• No results found

Picturing the ideal world: influencer marketing in perspective : the effects of influencers' characteristics on consumer responses through perceived self-presentation, and the moderating role of influencer type

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Picturing the ideal world: influencer marketing in perspective : the effects of influencers' characteristics on consumer responses through perceived self-presentation, and the moderating role of influencer type"

Copied!
45
0
0

Bezig met laden.... (Bekijk nu de volledige tekst)

Hele tekst

(1)

Picturing the ideal world: influencer marketing in

perspective

The effects of influencers' characteristics on consumer responses through

perceived self-presentation, and the moderating role of influencer type

Lisa Bos 10893822

Master thesis

Persuasive Communication University of Amsterdam Graduate School of Communication

Supervisor: G. Van Noort 28 June 2019

(2)

Abstract

Influencer marketing is experiencing a massive growth on social media platforms, such as Instagram. For brands it is difficult to strategically implement this form of marketing. Meanwhile, it is unclear which characteristics of an influencer are most important to obtain positive consumer responses. Moreover, it is unclear how personal profiles of influencers are perceived online. It is crucial to understand how consumers interpret the online self-presentation of influencers. This study investigates the effects of the two different influencer characteristics (i.e., attractiveness and expertise) on the consumer response toward the influencer and toward the post of female Instagram users between the ages of 20 and 39 (N = 144). In addition, the consumers’ perception of the influencers' self-presentation (actual or ideal) is explored and the type of influencer (beauty vs. non-beauty) reflected this effect. An online experiment was conducted, which indicated that the influencers’ characteristics had no significant effect on consumer responses through consumers' perceived influencers' self-presentation. Furthermore, no effect was found due to the type of influencer. Regardless of the influencers’ characteristics or the type of influencers, consumers perceived the online self-presentation of influencers as a version of their ideal self. In addition, the findings of this study indicate that when the self-presentation of influencers is perceived as their ideal self, this leads to negative consumer responses. However, when consumers perceive the influencers’ self-presentation as their actual self, this leads to positive consumer responses.

(3)

Introduction

Recently, influencer marketing has experienced tremendous growth. Influencers refer to the phenomenon of micro-celebrities, who have built an extensive social network of followers by communicating narration of their everyday lives online (Abidin, 2017). In particular, Instagram is currently one of the fastest growing social media platforms in influencer marketing (Evans, 2017). Brands prefer to use influencers as marketing strategy compared to traditional media, because of their trustworthiness and authenticity (Domingues & Reijmersdaal, 2018; Veirman et al., 2017; Evans, 2017). However, little is known about possible implementation in marketing strategy and the most difficult challenge is to identify an influencer who would have a strong impact on consumers’ behavior.

Despite the benefits an influencer would have for brands, trust is declining. The Edelman Trust Barometer 2019 suggests that influencers are perceived as one of the least credible source of information according to the Dutch population (Klok, 2019). An influencer is considered unreliable when consumers perceive the promoted products as falls or invalid (Cheung, Luo, Sia & Chen, 2009). Therefore, it becomes harder for brands to select the right influencer for their marketing strategy. It is essential for brands to understand which influencers’ characteristic is most useful to persuade a consumer.

The Source Credibility Model of Ohanian (1990) can provide substance to choose an effective influencer based on characteristics, most importantly are attractiveness and expertise. Multiple previous studies have shown that both expertise and attractiveness are effective for increasing consumer responses (Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017; Wang, Kao & Ngasmiriudom,

2017; Wang & Scheinbaum, 2018). However, these studies show contradiction since not all

findings suggest that both characteristics are useful. Multiple studies concluded that characteristic expertise is the most powerful dimension (Till & Busler, 2000; Ohanian, 1990; Maddux & Rogers, 1980) while other studies suggest that attractiveness is most important

(4)

(Silvera & Austad, 2004; Djafarova & Trifimenko, 2018; Kahle & Homer, 1985). To gain more insight into the importance of the influencers' characteristics, this study will investigate the effect of the different characteristics on the consumer responses toward the influencer and the Instagram post.

The use of photographs is an important part of the self-presentation on Instagram, which evokes consumers’ emotional responses (Chua & Chang, 2016). Social media users upload pictures to their Instagram profile, which highlight their ideal self (Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017). Previous research focused on presentation found that individuals perceive the self-presentation of friends as ‘misleading’ and ‘untrustworthy’ (DeAndrea & Walther, 2011). However, it is still unclear how the concept of self-presentation applies to influencer marketing. Influencers can either be perceived as an actual or ideal version of themselves (Hollenbeck & Kaikati, 2012). It is important to gain an understanding of how consumers perceive the self-presentation of influencers because a negative perception could provoke a negative response. The consumers’ perception of self-presentation (from actual to ideal) is dependent on the influencers’ credibility dimensions (i.e., attractiveness and expertise) and consequently influences consumer responses.

To strategically choose the right influencer, both the niche and the characteristics should match. Influencers can share content about various niches such as; fashion, beauty, food, and health (Niederhoff, Mooth, Wiesenfield & Gordon, 2007). According to the match-up hypothesis consumers find it necessary that the influencers’ characteristics match with the promoted product (Kahle & Homer, 1985). For example, an attractive influencer promoting a beauty product would positively influence consumer responses (Kamins, 1990). Since only little scientific research has been done on the impact of the niche of the influencer, this study aims to fill that gap by examining if the relation between product and characteristics could also apply to the niche. To gain more insight into whether or not matching the influencers’ niche

(5)

with the influencers’ characteristics indeed increases consumer responses. This study will be investigating whether the type of influencer (beauty vs. non-beauty) moderates this effect of the characteristics of the influencer on the consumers’ perception of the influencers’ self-presentation.

The study has several important theoretical contributions. Firstly, this study contributes to a better understanding of influencer marketing communication. Secondly, it provides new insight into which influencer characteristic (i.e., attractiveness and expertise) is most effective to gain positive consumer responses. Thirdly, it contributes to the literature about the actual and ideal self-presentation and it is the first to provide insights into how consumers perceive the self-presentation of influencers online.

The findings will provide insights that are important for different stakeholders. Firstly, for influencers, it is important to learn more about how to present content online in order to have a positive impact on their followers and customers of brands. Secondly, for law and regulations this research provides new insights that can contribute to further regulation of the Dutch ‘Social Media & Influencer Marketing Advertising Code’. Finally, for brands and marketers, this study contributes to a better understanding of the effect of influencer marketing on the consumer, and how this marketing tool can benefit a brand.

(6)

Theoretical Framework

Credibility and its dimension in influencer marketing

Two important dimensions (i.e., attractiveness and expertise) determine if the influencer can be seen as credible (Ohanian, 1990). Attractiveness refers to the physical attractiveness of the influencer (Bhatt, Jayswal & Patel, 2013). Expertise refers to the level of knowledge, skills, or professional explanations which the influencer can provide with his or her communication (Ohanian, 1990). Multiple studies have shown that both credibility dimensions have a positive influence on the brand attitude and purchase intentions (Wang et al., 2017; Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017; Visentin, Pizzi & Pichierri, 2019). Since influencer marketing is relatively new, the credibility dimension is often associated with celebrity endorsers or models. This study will investigate whether these credibility dimensions would apply for influencer marketing strategies.

Inconsistency between expertise and attractiveness

Previous research has found the two credibility dimensions as valid and reliable, even though there is a lack of consistency in the effectiveness of the credibility dimensions (Wang et al., 2017; Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017). Some studies concluded that expertise is the most important dimension (Till & Busler, 2000; Ohanian, 1990; Maddux & Rogers, 1980). Consumers have a more positive attitude toward a brand and are thus more likely to purchase a complex and expensive product if promoted by a perceived expert (Horai, Naccari &

Fatoullah, 1974; Friedman & Friedman, 1979; Ohanian, 1990) while other studies supported

attractiveness as the most important dimension (Silvera & Austad, 2004; Djafarova & Trifimenko, 2018; Kahle & Homer, 1985). An attractive source is better at conveying the quality and benefits of the product, which would result in a positive impact on the attitude and purchase intention of consumers (Kalhle & Homer, 1985). Furthermore, the study of Batt, Jayswall and Patel (2013) found support for both credibility dimensions, while brand attitude

(7)

was mostly influenced by expertise, advertisement attitude was mostly influenced by attractiveness. In sum, this study makes a distinction between an expert and an attractive influencer and will argue that both types of influencers have a different effect on influencer marketing communication responses.

Impact of attractiveness and expertise on attitude toward the influencer

The attitude toward the influencer can be described as an influencer who is well-liked by the consumer (Veirman, 2017). The attractiveness of an image is an important dimension as to why consumers’ decide to follow new profiles (Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017). When consumers are exposed to an attractive influencer, this evokes feelings of similarity and identification with the influencer (Bhatt, Jayswall & Patel, 2013; Silvera & Austad, 2004). Consumers are likely to follow an influencer on social media which is similar to their characteristics and lifestyle (Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017). Moreover, previous research found that the level of attractiveness has a positive impact on the attitude toward the influencer (Silvera & Austad, 2004). When consumers perceive the influencer as well-liked and charming, this could influence the consumers’ beliefs (Lim, Cheach & Wong, 2017). However, no previous study found an effect of the expertise characteristic on attitude toward the influencer. Therefore, this study suggests that the attractiveness will be more effective compared to the expertise of an influencer. This lead to the following hypothesis:

H1: When exposed to an attractive (versus expertise) influencer the participants will show a more positive attitude towards the influencer.

Impact of attractiveness and expertise on consumer engagement

With the rise of social media, consumer engagement has become an essential topic for brands. The consumer engagement on social media is the action of liking, commenting on, or sharing of a social media post (Barger & Labrecque, 2013). Previous research has concluded that when

(8)

the online engagement with the brand increases, this will consequently have a positive impact on the consumers’ purchase intentions (Chang & Ngai, 2011; See-To & Ho, 2014). In addition, with the enormous growth of influencer marketing, it is important for brands that consumers also engage with the profiles of influencers who are promoting the brand.

There is less academic research conducted on the effects of credibility dimensions upon consumer engagement. However, previous studies have investigated the impact of source credibility on the purchase intention and brand attitude. This shows a positive influence of source credibility on the consumers’ brand attitude and purchase intention (Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017; Visentin, Pizzi & Pichierri, 2019; Wang et al., 2017). Moreover, multiple studies concluded that expertise is a more important dimension compared to attractiveness to positively influences the consumers’ brand attitude and purchase intention (Bhatt et al., 2013; Till & Bussler, 2000 Maddux & Rogers, 1980; Ohanian, 1990). According to Maddux and Rogers (1980), dimension attractiveness can only be effective when this characteristic is used to support the effect of expertise.

In sum, this study expects that when the source expertise has a positive influence on the consumers’ brand attitude and purchase intention, this effect will be the same for customer engagement. Moreover, multiple studies state that the expertise characteristic can be considered as a more effective characteristic, compared to attractiveness characteristic. This leads to the following hypothesis:

H2: When exposed to an influencers’ expertise (versus attractiveness) the participants will show a more positive consumer engagement.

(9)

Explaining the impact of attractiveness and expertise: perception self-presentation of influencer

A possible factor that can explain the various consumer evaluations of the characteristics is the perception of the influencers’ self-presentation. There are different ways (actual or ideal) in which social media users can express themselves online (Seidman, 2013; Higgens, 1987). The actual self can be defined as the presentation of the authentic self which indicates that people choose to present really who they are online despite public judgment. In contrast, the ideal self can be defined as how a person wants to be perceived online which is a strategic choice as how to present themselves related to concerns about public perceptions (Hollenbeck & Kaikati, 2012). Previous studies confirmed that individuals do not always show the real version of themselves through online profiles. Users of social media sites present a better version of themselves to provoke positive responses from other people online, either to fit in or through fear (Toma, Hancock & Allison, 2008; Seidman, 2013; De Vries, Bulligngham & Vasconcelos, 2013). Thus, previous research argued the self-presentation of social media users. However, no academic study has been reported regarding the influencers’ self-presentation. Specifically, on how consumers perceive the influencers’ self-presentation.

Previous research has shown that consumers’ perception of celebrity authenticity positively influences the consumers’ intention to purchase a product (Audrezet, Kerviler & Molard, 2018). Authenticity can be explained as being unique and true to oneself (Ilicic and Webster, 2016). When consumers perceive the influencer as authentic, they consider the Instagram post transparent and honest (Ilicic &Webster, 2016; Audrezet et al., 2017). When consumers accept how a celebrity claims to be, this will result in consumers perceiving the influencer as portraying their real identity and thus authentic actual self-presentation (Ilicic & Webster, 2016). In sum, when consumers perceive the influencer as their actual self, this positively influences the consumer responses.

(10)

Furthermore, according to Ilicic and Webster (2016), consumers appreciate celebrities when they are an expert in their field and are successful because of their hard work. Consumers can relate to celebrities who are ‘self-made’ and work hard to achieve something. An expert influencer can be seen as a form of uniqueness and is perceived as being real (Ilicic and Webster, 2016). When a celebrity has high levels of attractiveness, consumers can become aware of the persuasive effects of this characteristic (Maddux & Rogers, 1980). Extremely attractive people can be perceived as too good to be true and will be considered as idealistic.

In sum, this study suggests that the credibility dimensions (i.e., attractiveness and expertise) will lead to consumers perceiving the influencer self-presentation in a different way. More specifically, this study expects that consumers who are exposed to an expert influencer will perceive this influencers’ self-presentation as a version of their actual self, while non-experts who are attractive will not be perceived as authentic but will be perceived as a version of their ideal self-presentation. Therefore, the following hypotheses are formulated:

H3: Exposure to an expert influencer (versus attractive) induces higher levels of actual self-presentation perceptions, and consequently lead-in (a) more positive attitude toward the influencer and (b) more positive consumer engagement.

H4: Exposure to an attractive influencer (versus expert) induces higher levels of ideal self-presentation perceptions, compared to an expert influencer, and consequently lead-in (a) less positive attitude toward the influencer and (b) less positive consumer engagement.

Type of influencer as a moderating principle

Brands can use different types of influencers for their influencer marketing strategy. Influencers can be divided into various niche markets. The present study suggests that the type of influencer (beauty versus non-beauty) can influence the relative importance of the mediators because of the match-up hypothesis which implies that consumers consider it essential that the

(11)

influencers’ characteristics match to the product they are promoting.

The match-up hypothesis by Kahle and Homer (1985) can explain the inconsistency of the importance of the attractiveness dimension. This match-up theory proposes that the attractiveness characteristic is not at any time even effective for consumer responses. According to Till and Busler (1998), the characteristics of the endorser need to match with the type of product that is promoted. Previous studies have indeed found that an attractive influencer is more effective in promoting a product which enhances ones’ attractiveness (Till & Busler, 1998; Kamins, 1990). Consumers can better establish a link between physically attractive endorsers promoting cosmetics, compared to promoting a computer. Moreover, this study suggests that the match-up hypothesis could also apply for matching the influencers’ characteristics with the influencers’ niche. A relation between an attractive influencer and an attractive-related niche (beauty) could cause the consumer to perceive the influencer as their actual self, this however does not translate to an expert influencer. According to Till and Busler (1998), consumers can better match an unattractive endorser with a product which is less important to someone's attractiveness. Therefore, this study expects that an expert influencer in combination with a non-beauty niche possibly also results in the consumers’ perception of the influencer as their actual self.

In sum, this study proposes that an attractive influencer in combination with a beauty niche will lead to a higher level of consumers’ perceived actual self-presentation. In addition, an expert influencer in combination with a non-beauty niche will lead to the same conclusion. Therefore, the following hypotheses are formulated:

H5a: Exposure to an expert influencer (versus attractive) induces higher levels of actual self-presentation perceptions, only when the participants are exposed to a non-beauty influencer (versus beauty influencer).

(12)

H5b: Exposure to an attractive influencer (versus expertise) induces higher levels of actual self-presentation compared to an expert influencer, only when the participants are exposed to a beauty influencer (versus non-beauty influencer).

Figure 1. Conceptual model

Method Design & Sample

The design was a 2 (Influencer characteristic: Expert vs. Attractiveness) x2 (Influencer type beauty vs. non-beauty) between-subjects factorial design. Since this study focuses on the social media platform Instagram, the participants of this research were Instagram users. This research specifically focused on the age group 20 - 39 years old as this group extensively uses Instagram (Oosterveer, 2018). In addition, since the influencer on the Instagram post was female, this study also focuses on female users.

A total of 146 participants took part in this study. Of these, two participants were executed from the sample due to indicating that they knew the person on the Instagram post. The opinion of these participants could already have been influenced because the participants were familiar with the influencer. The final sample of 144 participants (N = 144) consisted of an average age of 23.68 (SD= 2.33). The youngest respondent was 20 years old, and the oldest

(13)

respondent was 33 years old. Most of the participants were Dutch (91%), and for most of the participants, WO Master was the highest level of education (40.4%), followed by WO Bachelor (27.4%). In addition, 37.7% of the participants indicated that they used Instagram 30 - 60 minutes a day, followed by 26% used Instagram 60 – 90 minutes a day. Moreover, 84.2% of participants indicated that they followed influencers, and 69.9% of the participants stated that they followed brands on Instagram.

Procedure

The sampling method convenience sample was used to reach the participants. The participants were approached through a post on the researchers Instagram, Facebook, Linkedin and Whatsapp account. The social media post contained an open link to the online study. This method was used because data can be obtained quickly and easily with this approach. Upon opening the link, the participants were exposed to the information sheet and the informed consistent. After the participants agreed to participate in this study, some questions followed about the demographic characteristics of the participant. After answering these questions, participants were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions. Participants were able to complete the questionnaire based on the condition to which they were exposed. The participants then answered a number of questions about their perception of the influencers self-presentation, attitude towards the influencer and consumer engagement. Several control questions were formulated to examine whether the participants were familiar with the influencer and the brand, and if the participant thought the influencer was a good fit with the brand. The final two questions from the online survey included the manipulation check. Finally, the participants were thanked for their participation in this study (see Appendix 1 for complete survey). Stimulus material

For this study, four different Instagram posts in combinations with biographies were used in which two semi-fictitious influencers promoted the brand Corendon. A semi-fictitious

(14)

influencer was used to prevent participants from having an individual opinion about the influencer. The influencer used in this experiment is an existing Dutch micro-influencer in combination with one fictitious name, namely Beau Visser. Micro influencers (20.000 – 50.000 followers) were chosen because influencers with fewer followers are less likely to be recognized by the participants. Moreover, the brand Corendon was chosen because a vacation-related brand can both be applied for an attractive versus expertise influencer and a beauty versus non-beauty influencer. In addition, Corendon is a common brand that collaborates with influencers to create beautiful content and brand awareness (Jepma, 2019), thus using influencer marketing for this brand is externally valid. The brand was only shown in the text underneath the photo in the Instagram post.

Moreover, this study used two photos in the conditions reflecting the attractiveness manipulation. In contrast, the four biographies used in the conditions reflected the expertise and type of influencer (beauty vs. non-beauty) manipulation. In the expert condition, the influencer scored high on expertise and low on attractiveness, while in the attractive condition, the influencer scored high on attractiveness and low on expertise.

The characteristic attractiveness was manipulated by using a ‘selfie’ of an attractive influencer and an unattractive influencer. This type of picture was chosen because a selfie ensures that participants were only focused on the person’s face and were not distracted by other elements in the photo, as, the environment. To determine when an influencer can be seen as attractive, a pre-test was developed. Previous research also manipulated physical attractiveness by testing beforehand the level of agreement if the person in the picture is attractive or not (Horai, 1974). The two photos that were chosen for this research can be found in Appendix 2.

Secondly, the characteristic expertise was manipulated by using four different short Instagram biographies. This biography was shown at the same time as the Instagram post. In

(15)

order to determine when an influencer can be seen as an expert, the biographies were also tested in the pre-test. Previous research manipulated expertise as well by providing the participant with different text beforehand about the source expertise (Grewal & Gotlieb and Sarel, 1991; Buda and Zhang, 2000). In addition, to manipulate the type of influencer, the bio of the influencer was specifically adapted for a beauty influencer or a food influencer. A food influencer was used as a non-beauty influencer because food influencers have become very popular in recent years (Van der Galen, 2018). The four different biographies of the influencer can also be found in Appendix 2.

Pre-test

To ensure the manipulation of the influencers’ characteristics of attractiveness and expertise, a pre-test was executed. At first, the pre-test helped decide which female influencer can be seen as attractive and unattractive. Participants (N = 20) were asked to what extent they found the person on the ten photos attractive based on the physical attractiveness scale by Ohanian (1990). The scale consisted of 5 items, namely attractive, classy, beautiful, elegant and sexy (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). The Cronbach’s Alpha for all ten photos was between 0.7 and 0.95. The reliability analysis indicated that the scale was reliable. In addition, the pre-test of this study checked if the females on the photos can be seen as an expert. Participants were asked to what extent the person on the ten photos could be considered as an expert based on the expert scale by Ohanian (1990). The scale consists of 5 items, namely dependable, honest, reliable, sincere, and trustworthy (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). The Cronbach's Alpha for all ten photos was between 0.8 and 0.98. Again, the reliability analysis indicated that the scale was reliable. A requirement for the two chosen photos is that these photos only differ in terms of attractiveness and not in terms of expertise. Table 1 represents the mean scores of attractiveness and expertise.

(16)

Observed from Table 1 it could be concluded that the photo of female 2 showed the highest mean score on attractiveness. This photo was chosen as the attractive influencer. Furthermore, this female was also seen as a reasonable expert (see Table 1). In addition, for the non-attractive influencer, the photo of female 7 was selected because this female was perceived as a person with the same level of expertise as female 2 (see Table 1). A paired sample t-test was conducted to compare the two females and their perceived attractiveness. A significant difference in the scores was observed for the attractive influencer (M = 5.67, SD = 0.65) compared to the non-attractive influencer (M = 4.84, SD = 0.51), t (20) = 1.732, p < 0.001. A second paired sample t-test was conducted to compare their physical attractiveness on their level of expertise. There was no significant difference in the scores for the expertise of the attractive influencer (M = 4.80, SD = 0.79) and the non-attractive influencer (M= 4.88, SD = 0.62), t (20) = -.455, p = .645. Based on the results of the pre-test, the manipulation of attractiveness can be seen as successful.

Table 1. Means and standard deviations of attractiveness and expertise.

Attractiveness M SD Expertise M SD Female 1 3.18 0.70 3.16 0.81 Female 2 5.67 0.65 4.80 0.79 Female 3 3.90 0.78 3.13 0.69 Female 4 3.96 0.53 4.44 0.68 Female 5 2.90 0.65 4.22 0.74 Female 6 4.59 0.81 4.71 0.60 Female 7 4.84 0.51 4.88 0.62 Female 8 3.24 0.74 3.30 0.88 Female 9 3.48 0.64 4.35 0.58 Female 10 4.21 0.95 3.94 0.86

Note. M = means, SD = standard deviations.

Secondly, the pre-test was applied to test whether the manipulation of expertise through four different biographies, is succeeded.For all four biographies participants had to indicate to what

(17)

extent they perceived the person described as an expert (1 = not at all, 7 = very much). The participants perceived both the inexperienced food influencer (M = 1.40, SD=0.60) and the inexperienced beauty influencer as a non-expert (M = 1.65, SD = 0.75). In addition, the participants perceived both the experienced food influencer (M = 4.50, SD = 0.95) and the experienced beauty influencer as an expert (M = 4.55, SD=0.95). Based on the results of the pre-test, the manipulation of influencers’ expertise can be seen as successful.

Measurement of variables

Attitude toward the influencer. The attitude toward the influencer was measured by adapting the published scale by Silvera and Austid (2004). The participants were asked to describe their overall feelings about the influencer presented in the Instagram post on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). The scale consisted of four items, namely uninteresting - interesting, unpleasant - pleasant, unlikeable - likable and bad - good. The item ‘unlikeable – likable’ had a low factor load which was achieved by reversing it in the questionnaire, to avoid resignation. Therefore, this item was not taken into account when the remaining three items loaded on one factor and formed a reliable scale (EV = 2.38, Cronbach's alpha = 0.81), with an average attitude toward the influencer of 4.09 (SD = 1.13).

Perceived self-presentation influencer. The self-presentation (i.e., actual and ideal) was measured by adapting the published scale of Seidman (2013) in both cases; self-presentation concepts where the scale consisted of three items (1= extremely unlikely, 7 = extremely likely). The participants were asked to describe their perception of the influencers’ self-presentation by answering the following questions: ‘The influencer posts status updates / photos / updates on their profile to express who she really is or who she ideally likes to be.’ Items with regards to ‘who she really is’ reflect the actual self-presentation and items with regard to ‘who she ideally likes to be’ reflected the ideal self-presentation. The items loaded on two factors (EV = 3.16 and EV = 1.86), for respectively ideal and actual presentation. The concept actual

(18)

presentation formed a reliable scale (Cronbach's alpha = 0.88), with an average actual self-presentation of 3.60 (SD = 1.26). In addition, the concept ideal self-self-presentation formed a reliable scale (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.92), with an average ideal self-presentation of 5.47 (SD = 1.23).

Customer engagement. Customer engagement was measured by adapting the published scale of Barger and Labrecque (2013) where the scale consists of three items (1 = extremely likely, 7 = extremely unlikely). The participants were asked to describe the probability to engage with the Instagram post by answering the following questions: ‘how likely are you to like this post / share this post / comment on this post.' The item ‘how likely the participant is to like the post' had a low factor load. Therefore, this item was not taken into account when combining the scale. The remaining two items loaded on one factor and formed a reliable scale (Eigenvalues: 2.18, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.85), with an average customer engagement of 1.55 (SD = 0.86). Control questions. The control questions tested whether the participants were familiar with the brand Corendon (84.4% yes) and the person on the photo (98% no), if the participants ever booked a holiday with Corendon (66.7% no), and if the participant thought that the brand was a good fit with the influencer. The question of if the brand was a good fit with the influencer was tested on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). The average fit between the brand and the influencer was 2.57 (SD = 1.00).

Manipulation check

To check if participants perceived the four different Instagram posts as intended, two manipulation checks were conducted. At first, participants were asked if the Instagram picture was posted by (1) a food influencer or (2) a beauty influencer. The manipulation check for the influencer type would indicate that participants perceived a clear difference between the type of niches that the influencer represents in the four conditions, χ2 (3) = 84.75, p < 001. The manipulation check resulted in 30.8% of the participants confirming to recognize the food

(19)

influencer, and 69.2% of the participants confirming to recognize the beauty influencer. Arguably the manipulation check for type of influencer was successful.

Secondly, participants were asked if the presented influencer was (1) an inexperienced influencer or (2) an experienced influencer. The manipulation check for the influencers’ expertise would give an indication that participants perceived a clear difference between an inexperienced influencer and an experienced influencer in the four conditions, χ2 (3) = 35.69, p < .001. The second manipulation check was again a success for characteristic expertise with 48.6% of the participants recognizing the experienced influencer, and 51.4% of the participants recognizing the unexperienced influencer. Finally, participants were asked to what extent the brands would fit with the influencer. The manipulation indicated that participants did not perceive a clear difference in the fit between the influencer and the brand in the four conditions, F (3, 142) = 0.216, p = .885. Concluding that the participants perceived the fit between the brand and the influencer equal across all four conditions.

Results Randomization check

Various randomization checks have been conducted to check if the conditions were comparable based on several variables. These checks indicated that the conditions were equally distributed based on the variables; age, F (3, 142) = 0.441, p = .718 and daily Instagram use χ2 (3) = 0.37, p = .985. The conditions also did not differ in the number of participants who were familiar with the brand χ2 (3) = 5.18, p = .198 and who have booked a holiday with Corendon χ2 (3) = 5.02, p = .195. This indicates that these variables will not influence the results of this study. Hypotheses testing

To test the conceptual model of this study a moderated mediation analysis was conducted using PROCESS model 7 (Hayes, 2013), using the perceived self-presentation of influencer as a mediating variable and the type of influencer as a moderating principle. This analysis was

(20)

performed twice, first for the dependent variable attitude toward the influencer and second for the variable customer engagement.

Hypotheses 1 and 2. For hypothesis 1, it was stated that when participants were exposed to an attractive influencer, this would lead to a more positive attitude towards the influencer compared to the expert influencer. In the case of hypothesis 2, when participants were exposed to an expert influencer, this would lead to more positive customer engagement, compared to an attractive influencer.

No significant direct effect of consumers’ attitude toward the influencer was found (b = 0.166, p = 0.304) based on the influencers’ characteristics. Participants who were exposed to an attractive influencer did not report a more positive attitude toward the influencer than participants who were exposed to an expert influencer. Second, no significant direct effect of influencers characteristics upon customer engagement was found, (b = -0.121, p = 0.372). Participants who were exposed to an expert influencer did not report a more positive customer engagement than participants who were exposed to an attractive influencer (see Table 2). Thus, hypotheses 1 and 2 cannot be confirmed.

Table 2. Effects of influencer characteristics on the consumer responses towards the influencer and the post.

Effect SE Indirect effect

(95% BCAB) Attitude towards

the influencer

0.166 0.161 [-,152; ,484]

Engagement -0.121 0.123 [-,327; ,122]

Note. Effect = non-standardized b coefficient; SE = corresponding standard deviation; BCAB = Bias corrected and accelerated interval.

Hypotheses 3 and 4. For hypotheses 3 and 4 it was stated that exposure to an expert influencer induces higher levels of actual self-presentation, and consequently would lead to more positive consumer responses toward the influencer and towards the post, while exposure to an attractive

(21)

influencer induces higher levels of ideal self-presentation and consequently to less positive consumer responses.

No direct significant effect was found for the characteristics of influencers on concepts of perceived actual (b= 0.153, p = .450) nor ideal (b = -0.029, p = .889) self-presentation of the influencer. When participants were exposed to an expert or an attractive influencer, there is no difference in how participants perceived the influencers’ self-presentation. Moreover, this analysis shows that the mediators are parallel to each other. The actual self-presentation has a positive direction, and the ideal self-presentation has a negative direction. Despite the fact that there is no significant difference between the credible dimensions (i.e., attractiveness and expertise), the ideal self-presentation scored higher compared to the actual self-presentation on both dimensions (see Table 3).

Secondly, a significant direct effect was found for the perceived actual self-presentation of an influencer on the attitude towards the influencer (b = 0.504, p <. 001). Moreover, no direct effect was found of the perceived ideal self-presentation on the attitude towards the influencer (b = 0.113, p = .10). Only when the participants perceived the influencers’ self-presentation as their actual self, this did report to a more positive attitude towards the influencer. A significant direct effect was found for the perceived actual self-presentation on customer engagement (b = 0.283, p < .001). Furthermore, a significant direct negative effect was found for the perceived ideal self-presentation on customer engagement (b = -0.191, p < 0.001). When the participants perceived the influencers’ self-presentation as their actual self, this did report to a more positive consumer engagement. However, when the participants perceived the influencers' self-presentation as their ideal self, this did report to more negative consumer engagement. Thus, hypotheses 3 and 4 can be partly confirmed.

(22)

Table 3. Means and standards deviations of credibility dimension on the perceptions of influencers’ self-presentation. Actual M SD Ideal M SD Attractive influencer 3.53 1.12 5.49 1.18 Expert influencer 3.69 1.32 5.46 1.29

Note. M = means, SD = standard deviations.

Hypotheses 5a and 5b. It was formulated for hypothesis 5a and 5b that when participants are exposed to an expert influencer in the field of food, this would lead to a higher level of actual self-presentation (vs. an expert influencer in the field of beauty). When participants are exposed to an attractive influencer in the area of beauty, this would lead to a higher level of actual self-presentation (vs. an attractive influencer in the field of food). No signification moderated mediation effect was found (see Table 4 and 5). Therefore, the type of influencer would have no influence on the presumed mediation effect of the influencers’ characteristics through consumers’ perceived self-presentation on the outcome variables attitude toward influencer and consumer engagement. Thus, hypothesis 5a and 5b cannot be confirmed.

Table 4. Indirect effect of characteristics influencers on Attitude and Engagement through actual self-presentation. Type of influencer Attitude Effect SE (95% BCAB) Engagement Effect SE (95% BCAB) Beauty -0.012 0.147 [-,305; ,268] -0.007 0.085 [-,172; ,168] Food -0.179 0.146 [-,107; ,474] 0.100 0.085 [-,054; ,277] Note. Effect = non-standardized b coefficient; SE = corresponding standard deviation; BCAB = Bias corrected and accelerated interval.

(23)

Table 5. Indirect effect of characteristics influencers on attitude and engagement through ideal self-presentation. Type of influencer Attitude Effect SE (95% BCAB) Engagement Effect SE (95% BCAB) Beauty -0.007 0.038 [-,093; ,070] 0.011 0.059 [-,103; ,129] Food 0.001 0.038 [-,080; ,083] -0.001 0.057 [-,112; ,115] Note. Effect = non-standardized b coefficient; SE = corresponding standard deviation; BCAB = Bias corrected and accelerated interval.

Discussion Conclusion

This research aimed to provide more insight to brands about the effectiveness of influencer marketing to reach their consumers. Moreover, this study aimed to investigate the effect of different influencer characteristics (i.e., attractiveness and expertise) on consumer responses towards the influencer and the post, to what extent the perceptions of influencers’ self-presentation (ideal or actual) mediates such effect and whether the type of influencer (food vs. beauty) moderates this effect. In order to fulfill this question, this study used an online survey where participants were confronted with an Instagram post and a bio of an influencer and asked for their opinions about the influencer and the post.

In contrast to the hypotheses (H1 & H2), the results of this study could not confirm that there is a difference between the two influencer characteristics (i.e., attractiveness and expertise. This implies that an attractive influencer does not lead to a more positive attitude towards the influencer compared to an expert influence, and vice versa. Moreover, it was striking that the scores for customer engagement were extremely low. This indicated that the largest percentage of the participants has no intention of being engaged with the Instagram post. These results were less clear due to a possible ceiling effect.

The findings of this study are in contrary to the findings of multiple studies which stated that attractiveness is a more effective dimension (Silvera & Austad, 2004; Djafarova &

(24)

Trifimenko, 2018; Kahle & Homer, 1985), and previous findings which concluded that expertise had a greater effect on consumer responses (Till & Busler, 2000; Ohanian, 1990; Maddux & Rogers, 1980). However, the findings of this study correspond to previous research that concluded that both source characteristics are equally useful for positive consumer responses (Wang et al., 2017). Moreover, in previous studies, the Credibility Model was used to explain the effects between the characteristics (i.e., attractiveness and expertise). These studies used celebrities, models, or spokespersons to investigate the impact of endorsers. A possible explanation for the findings of this study could be that the effect of the dimensions is different for influencers, due to these characteristics being experienced the same. Another possible explanation could be that these characteristics (i.e., attractiveness and expertise) could be less essential for influencers. For brands the number of followers of influencers is an important factor to reach a lot of consumers. Influencers with a high number of followers on Instagram positively influence the consumer responses towards the influencer, due to influencer being considered as popular (Veirman, 2017). Possibly, the number of followers could be more effective as an influencer characteristic, compared to attractiveness and expertise.

In contrast to the hypotheses (H3ab & H4ab), the results of this study could not confirm that the perceptions of influencers’ self-presentation mediated the effects of influencers’ characteristics on the consumers’ responses towards the influencer and the post. One of the most interesting findings is that despite being exposed to an expert or attractive influencer consumers generally perceive the online self-presentation as ideal compared to actual self. This result could be a possible explanation as to why no difference in effect between the influencers’ characteristics and perceived self-presentation was found. This explanation is partly inline with previous studies which concluded that people perceive the online self-presentation of friends

(25)

as ‘untrustworthy’ and ‘misleading’ (DeAndrea & Walther, 2011). Moreover, the results of the study show that this effect can also be applied in influencer marketing.

Furthermore, a direct effect of perceptions of influencers’ self-presentation on consumer responses towards the influencer and post are applied. It can be concluded that when consumers perceive the influencers' self-presentation as a version of their actual self, this leads to positive consumer responses. When the consumer perceives the influencers' self-presentation as a version of their ideal self, this leads to negative consumer response towards the post. This implies that only when consumers assume that an influencer presents the actual version of themselves online, this leads to positive responses towards the influencer and post. The findings of this study are partly inline with previous research which concluded that when consumers perceive the celebrity as authentic, this positively influences the consumers’ intention to purchase a product (Ilicic &Webster, 2016). Therefore, the findings of this study can be explained by the fact that consumers perceive the influencer as their actual self when feelings of authenticity arise. Accordingly, this leads to positive consumer responses and this effect can also be applied to influencer marketing.

It can be concluded that different types of influencers had no impact on the mediation of the influencers’ characteristics and the consumers’ perceptions of influencers’ self-presentation. This indicated that there is no difference in response when consumers are exposed to one of the influencers’ characteristics in combination with a certain niche on how consumers perceive the influencers' self-presentation. These results are partly in contrast to previous studies, who used the matching hypothesis to explain why the characteristic attractiveness did not always influence the consumer responses (Till & Busler, 1998; Kamins, 1990). This theory states that the endorsers’ characteristic should match with the product type that is promoted. The current study used influencer instead of product type to match with the characteristics of the influencer. One reason for the lack of support toward this hypothesis could be that the

(26)

influencer type has a different role compared to the product type. Consumers consider it essential that the promoted product matches with the endorser (Till & Busler, 1998). It is possible that consumers are more interested in the product that is promoted, compared to influencers who share content about a specific niche.

Limitations & suggestions for future research

Unfortunately, this study has several limitations. Firstly, considering the manipulation of the food influencer, the Instagram post conditions were not perceived as intended by the participants, which possibly lead to a less clear result. Most of the participants indicated that they experienced the influencer on Instagram as a beauty influencer even when participants were exposed to the food influencer condition. A possible explanation for these results can be that this study used a ‘selfie' as photo for the stimulus material. This type of photo is often associated with the presentation of physical beauty on social media (Chua & Chang, 2016). For future research it would be interesting to investigate whether using a different type of photo ensures better manipulation, which can obtain more accurate results than found in the current study. For example, a picture with environmental elements.

Secondly, considering the type of platform, the current study used Instagram as social media platform. This implies that the results of this study can only be generated for influencers who are active on Instagram. Future research may consider investigating the different effects of various social media platforms to achieve generalizability. Various type of platforms could lead to other effects as social media users experience each platform in a different way (Voorveld, Noort, Muntinga & Bronner, 2018). For example, Snapchat is one of the popular photo-sharing network services (Lee & Sin, 2016) or YouTube is as well a popular platform, which influencers use to evaluate brands and their products in videos (Schwemmer & Ziewiecki, 2018).

(27)

Finally, considering the influencers’ self-presentation, which was provided in the form of a photo in combination with a biography. However, previous studies suggest that visual content (photos and videos) is the most powerful form of self-presentation, compared to text (Kleemans, Daalmans, Carbaat, & Anschütz, 2018). The use of a photo in combination with text could not give participants a clear image of the influencers’ self-presentation. The implications this has for future research is to provide consumers with a more clearly illustrated influencer self-presentation. This could be accomplished by the use of video content which would result in consumers perceiving the online self-presentation of an influencer in a more real way which is different from written content. For example, currently the use of ‘stories’ is a popular form of video content on Instagram.

Theoretical and practical implications

The findings of this study provide insight about the effectiveness of the credibility dimensions (i.e., attractiveness and expertise) in influencer marketing. Previous literature mentioned, influencers have been considered as more trustworthy compared to traditional media when communicating about a brand or product. Comparing the two types of influencers (beauty vs food and attractiveness vs expertise) showed no difference in how they were perceived by the participant. This has theoretical implications that consumer reactions are not dependent on the source type. Future research may provide insight by take in to account advertising content or social media context that influence source credibility (Ashley & Tuten, 2015; Calder, Isaac & Malthouse, 2016). For example, it would be interesting to investigate the importance of types of messages.

Secondly, this study is the first to shed some light on the concept of self-presentation perceptions by consumers in influencer marketing, other than examining self-presentation of social media users. An important finding of this study is that although consumers were

(28)

exposed to different types of influencers, the influencers’ self-presentation is generally perceived as idealistic. Theoretically this implies that consumers already have a certain opinion about influencers, regardless of the type of niche or specific characteristics. There are different motivations and behaviour for forming impressions toward someone’s

self-presentation (Schlenker & Britt, 1999). Future research may investigate the motivations of perceptions of consumers towards the influencers.

The following practical implications can be formulated. The findings of this study suggest that consumers don’t experience an attractive or expert influencer differently. Consumers response toward the influencer and post are the same, regardless of the influencer type. Therefore, it is not necessary for brands to choose a certain type of influencer as marketing tool. However, consumers become more sceptical about influencers as an important finding of this study suggest that generally consumers find the self-presentation of influencers idealistic. This finding implies that it is not important to look at what type of influencer is essential, but rather if influencer marketing is still effective for brands. At first, influencers were considered more reliable than brands, but perhaps you can conclude from this study that influencer marketing is slowly dying. Although influencers are not considered as authentic, the finding of this study suggests that when consumers do perceive the influencers’ self-presentation as actual, this positively influences consumer responses. The self-presentation of influencers is a relatively new field that still requires extensive scientific research. For brands and influencers, it is most important to know whether an influencer is considered authentic. However, the authenticity framework poses that brands and influencers can implement different strategies to improve the influencers authenticity, such as expressing the influencers’ passion or being transparent about partnership disclosures (Audrez, Kerviler & Moulard, 2018). From this study it can be concluded that if brands still want to select an influencer as a marketing tool, monitoring of the authenticity is essential.

(29)

References

Abidin, C. (2016). Visibility labour: Engaging with Influencers’ fashion brands and# OOTD advertorial campaigns on Instagram. Media International Australia, 161(1), 86-100. Ashley, C., & Tuten, T. (2015). Creative strategies in social media marketing: An exploratory

study of branded social content and consumer engagement. Psychology and Marketing, 32(1), 15-27.

Audrezet, A., De Kerviler, G., & Moulard, J. G. (2018). Authenticity under threat: When social media influencers need to go beyond self-presentation. Journal of Business Research. 1-13.

Bhatt, N., Jayswal, R. M., & Patel, J. D. (2013). Impact of celebrity endorser's source credibility on attitude towards advertisements and brands. South Asian Journal of Management, 20(4), 74.

Barger, V. A., & Labrecque, L. (2013). An integrated marketing communications perspective on social media metrics. International Journal of Integrated Marketing

Communications, Spring.

Bullingham, L., & Vasconcelos, A. C. (2013). The presentation of self in the online world: Goffman and the study of online identities. Journal of Information Science, 39(1), 101-112.

Buda, R., & Zhang, Y. (2000). Consumer product evaluation: The interactive effect of message framing, presentation order and source credibility. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 9(4), 229-242.

Calder, B. J., Isaac, M. S., & Malthouse, E. C. (2016). How to capture consumer experiences: A context-specific approach to measuring engagement: Predicting consumer behavior across qualitatively different experiences. Journal of Advertising Research, 56(1), 39-

(30)

52.

Chan, Y. Y., & Ngai, E. W. (2011). Conceptualising electronic word of mouth activity: An input-process-output perspective. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 29(5), 488-516.

Chua, T. H. H., & Chang, L. (2016). Follow me and like my beautiful selfies: Singapore teenage girls’ engagement in self-presentation and peer comparison on social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 55 (?), 190–197.

Cheung, M. Y., Luo, C., Sia, C. L., & Chen, H. (2009). Credibility of electronic word-of- mouth: Informational and normative determinants of on-line consumer

recommendations. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 13(4), 9-38. DeAndrea, D. C., & Walther, J. B. (2011). Attributions for inconsistencies between online

and offline self-presentations. Communication Research, 38(6), 805-825.

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.

De Vries, D. A. (2014). Social media and online self-presentation: Effects on how we see ourselves and our bodies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of

Amsterdam.

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.

Djafarova, E., & Trofimenko, O. (2018). ‘Instafamous’–credibility and selfpresentation of micro-celebrities on social media. Information, Communication and

Society, 0(0), 1-15.

(31)

influencer marketing. SWOCC: Amsterdam

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.

Friedman, H.H. & Friedman, L. (1979). Endorsers effectiveness by product type. Journal of Advertising Research, 19(5), 63-71.

Grewal, D., Gotlieb, J., & Marmorstein, H. (1994). The moderating effects of message framing and source credibility on the price-perceived risk relationship. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 145-153.

Hayes, A.F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Journal of Educational Measurement, 51(3), 335-337.

Higgins, E.T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94(3), 319-340.

Hollenbeck, C. R., & Kaikati, A. M. (2012). Consumers' use of brands to reflect their

actual and ideal selves on Facebook. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29(4), 395-405.

Horai, J., Naccari, N., & Fatoullah, E. (1974). The effects of expertise and physical attractiveness upon opinion agreement and liking. Sociometry, 37(4), 601-606.

Jepma, L. (2019, April 4th) Social travel: Corendon boekt winst en stoot KLM van de troon.

Retrieved from, https://www.emerce.nl/research/social-travel-30-corendon-

boekt-winst-stoot-klm-troon

Kahle, L. R., & Homer, P. M. (1985). Physical attractiveness of the celebrity endorser: A social adaptation perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(4), 954-961. Kamins, M. A. (1990). An investigation into the “match-up” hypothesis in celebrity

(32)

advertising: When beauty may be only skin deep. Journal of Advertising, 19(1), 4-13. Kim, S. S., Choe, J. Y. J., & Petrick, J. F. (2018). The effect of celebrity on brand awareness,

perceived quality, brand image, brand loyalty, and destination attachment to a literary festival. Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, 9(3), 320-329.

Kleemans, M., Daalmans, S., Carbaat, I., & Anschütz, D. (2018). Picture Perfect: The Direct Effect of Manipulated Instagram Photos on Body Image in Adolescent Girls. Media Psychology, 21(1), 93– 110.

Klok, M. (2019, February 19th). Geloofwaardigheidsprobleem influencers vraagt om directe

actie, ook van merken. Retrieved from,

https://www.adformatie.nl/influencer-marketing/moet-influencer-marketing-verder-gereguleerd-worden

Lee, & Sin. (2016). Why Do People View Photographs on Instagram? In Digital Libraries: Knowledge, Information, and Data in an Open Access Society. 100, 339–350. Lim, X. J., Cheah, J. H., & Wong, M. W. (2017). The impact of social media influencers on

purchase intention and the mediation effect of customer attitude. Asian Journal of Business Research, 7(2), 19.

Ilicic, J., & Webster, C. M. (2016). Being true to oneself: Investigating celebrity brand authenticity. Psychology and Marketing, 33(6), 410-420.

Maddux, J. E., & Rogers, R. W. (1980). Effects of source expertness, physical attractiveness, and supporting arguments on persuasion: A case of brains over beauty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(2), 235.

Niederhoffer, K., Mooth, R., Wiesenfeld, D., & Gordon, J. (2007). The origin and impact of CPG new-product buzz: Emerging trends and implications. Journal of Advertising Research, 47(4), 420-426.

Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and Validation of a Scale to Measure Celebrity Endorsers' Perceived Expertise, Trustworthiness, and Attractiveness. Journal of

(33)

Advertising, 19(3), 39-52.

Oosterveer, D. (2019, January 26th) Social media in Nederland 2019: Facebook verliest ruim half miljoen gebruikers. Retrieved from,

https://www.marketingfacts.nl/berichten/social-media-in-nederland-2019-facebook-verliest-meer-dan-een-half-miljoen.

See-To, E. W., & Ho, K. K. (2014). Value co-creation and purchase intention in social network sites: The role of electronic Word-of-Mouth and trust–A theoretical analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 182-189.

Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality influences social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(3), 402-407.

Silvera, D. H., & Austad, B. (2004). Factors predicting the effectiveness of celebrity endorsement advertisements. European Journal of Marketing, 38(11), 1509-1526. Schlenker, B. R., & Britt, T. W. (1999). Beneficial impression management: Strategically

controlling information to help friends. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(4), 559.

Schwemmer, C., & Ziewiecki, S. (2018). Social media sellout: The increasing role of product promotion on YouTube. Social Media+ Society, 4(3), 1-20.

Toma, C. L., & Carlson, C. L. (2015). How do Facebook users believe they come across in their profiles?: A meta-perception approach to investigating Facebook self-

presentation. Communication Research Reports, 32(1), 93-101.

Till, B. D., & Busler, M. (1998). Matching products with endorsers: attractiveness versus

expertise. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 15(6), 576-586.

Till, B. D., & Busler, M. (2000). The match-up hypothesis: Physical attractiveness, expertise, and the role of fit on brand attitude, purchase intent and brand beliefs. Journal of Advertising, 29(3), 1-13.

(34)

Van der Galen. (2018, October 11th). 5 Nederlandse top influencers. Retrieved from,

https://www.brandambassadors.nl/5-nederlandse-food-influencers/

Visentin, M., Pizzi, G., & Pichierri, M. (2019). Fake News, Real Problems for Brands: The Impact of Content Truthfulness and Source Credibility on consumers' Behavioral Intentions toward the Advertised Brands. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 45, 99- 112.

Voorveld, H. A., van Noort, G., Muntinga, D. G., & Bronner, F. (2018). Engagement with social media and social media advertising: The differentiating role of platform type. Journal of Advertising, 47(1), 38-54.

Wang, S. W., Kao, G. H. Y., & Ngamsiriudom, W. (2017). Consumers' attitude of

endorser credibility, brand and intention with respect to celebrity endorsement of the airline sector. Journal of Air Transport Management, 60(2), 10-17.

Wang, S. W., & Scheinbaum, A. C. (2018). Enhancing brand credibility via celebrity

endorsement: Trustworthiness trumps attractiveness and expertise. Journal of Advertising Research, 58(1), 16-32.

(35)

Appendices Appendix 1: Survey

Dear Participant,

Hereby I would like to invite you to participate in a research study to be conducted under the responsibility of the Graduate School of Communication, a part of the University of

Amsterdam. The study is supervised by Lisa Bos, Master student at the University of

Amsterdam (UvA). This research is about the attitude towards influencers. Participation will take approximately five minutes. You are required to be at least 18 years of age.

As this research is being carried out under the responsibility of the ASCoR, University of Amsterdam, we can guarantee that:

1) Your anonymity will be safeguarded, and that your personal information will not be passed on to third parties under any conditions, unless you first give your express permission for this.

2) You can refuse to participate in the research or cut short your participation without having to give a reason for doing so. You also have up to 24 hours after participating to withdraw your permission to allow your answers or data to be used in the research.

3) Participating in the research will not entail your being subjected to any appreciable risk or discomfort, the researchers will not deliberately mislead you, and you will not be exposed to any explicitly offensive material.

(36)

4) No later than five months after the conclusion of the research, we will be able to provide you with a research report that explains the general results of the research.

For more information about the research and the invitation to participate, you are welcome to contact Lisa Bos (bos.lisa@hotmail.com) at any time.

Should you have any complaints or comments about the course of the research and the

procedures it involves as a consequence of your participation in this research, you can contact the designated member of the Ethics Committee representing ASCoR, at the following

address: ASCoR Secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020-­‐ 525 3680; ascor-­‐secr-­‐fmg@uva.nl.

Any complaints or comments will be treated in the strictest confidence.

I hope that I have provided you with sufficient information. I would like to take this opportunity to thank you in advance for participating in this research, which I greatly appreciate.

(37)

Please click on the arrows to go to the informed consent form to participate in this study.

I hereby declare that I have been informed in a clear manner about the nature and method of the research, as set out in the introduction.

I agree, fully and voluntarily, to participate in this research study. I hereby retain the right to withdraw my consent, without having to give a reason for doing so. I am aware that I may halt my participation in the experiment at any time.

If my research results are used in scientific publications or are made public in another way, this will be done such a way that my anonymity is completely safeguarded. My personal data will not be passed on to third parties without my express permission.

If I wish to receive more information about the research, either now or in future, I can contact Master student Lisa Bos, bos.lisa@hotmail.com and/or her supervisor Guda van Noort, g.vannoort@uva.nl. Should I have any complaints about this research, I can contact the designated member of the Ethics Committee representing the ASCoR, at the following address: ASCoR secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020-­‐ 525 3680; ascor-­‐ secr-­‐ fmg@uva.nl

o   I understand the text presented above and I agree to participate in the research study o   I have decided not to participate in this study.

(38)

What is your gender? o   Male

o   Female

What is your age? ………

What is your highest level of education? o   Primary school o   VMBO o   HAVO o   VWO o   MBO o   HBO o   WO Bachelor o   WO Master o   None of these

What is your nationality? ………

Do you have an Instagram account? o   Yes

(39)

How long do you use Instagram on a daily basis? o   0 – 15 minutes o   15 – 30 minutes o   30- 60 minutes o   60 – 90 minutes o   90 – 120 minutes o   more than 120 mintues

Do you follow influencers on Instagram?

o   Yes o   No

Q10. Do you follow brands on Instagram? o   Yes

o   No

Two different text:

On the next page, the biography and an Instagram post of a popular, successful Dutch influencer are displayed. Please have a look at this complete post carefully.

It's only possible to click on the arrow after 15 seconds Next, a number of questions will be asked regarding the influencer and the Instagram post you just have seen. Please read the questions carefully.

(40)

OR

On the next page, the biography and an Instagram post of an unknown Dutch influencer, who just started blogging a few months ago, are displayed. Please have a look at this complete post carefully. It's only possible to click on the arrow after 15 seconds. Next, a number of questions will be asked regarding the influencer and the Instagram post you just have seen. Please read the questions carefully

The influencer post status updates on Instagram to express

…the way they ideally like to be

Extremely unlikely 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 extremely likely

…who they really are

Extreme unlikely 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 extremely likely

The influencer post photographs on Instagram to express

….the way they ideally like to be

Referenties

GERELATEERDE DOCUMENTEN

This research focuses on the social media platform Instagram as influencers are most active on this platform (Influencermarketinghub, 2021). 1.3 Research question.. The

To what extent do source gender, disclosure position, and disclosure language impact advertisement recognition, brand attitude, and purchase intention, moderated by source

engagement on Instagram, but also how influencers identify themselves (social presence) and what kind of products they show (product congruence). Other studies investigated the

The fast growth of Internet-based social networking applications (such as Facebook and Instagram) and advanced information technologies (such as smart phones and

• People on Instagram, next to celebrity influencers, who have a large following on social media (Bijen, 2017; Kalavrezos, 2016).. • Comparable to celebrity influencers

To assess the impact of product placement condition (popular influencer versus brand owned Instagram page) and self-control depletion condition (depletion versus no depletion)

brand presence and type of influencer are linked to influencer marketing and can affect the advertising effectiveness.. Research related to Instagram

Thus, different from their work, current research regards influencer recommendation as an attribute in combination with price and brand types attributes in a choice