The impact of sponsored blog posts on Instagram on
e-WOM of blog readers: the moderating role of storytelling.
By:
Heleen Lalisang 10073892
Master’s Thesis for Master’s Programme Communication Science
Graduate School of Communication | University of Amsterdam
Dr. S. F. Bernritter
Abstract
This study examined the effect of disclosure (overt marketing, covert marketing) in a blog post on consumers’ behavioural intentions (i.e. electronic word-of-mouth) on Instagram through narrative cues (narrative and factual) by conducting an online experiment. For the purpose of this study a real-life example was used through the network of Wendy van Soest. 20,000 were approached; in the end 207 people participated in this study. The results of this study show that overt marketing is more beneficial to encourage intention to forward (e-WOM) than the use of covert marketing. Also, it showed that attitudinal persuasion knowledge serves as a mediating variable between the relationship of disclosure and e-WOM. This study showed an interaction effect; storytelling is a good way to use when bloggers or marketers decide to use covert marketing, since it will encourage e-WOM. The effect of storytelling on disclosure and e-WOM in overt marketing was not as big as for covert marketing.
Introduction
Consumers are exposed to over 5000 advertise posts daily, however these customers are so used to seeing such advertise messages, that they only perceive 1 to 2 per cent of those messages (Petty & Andrews, 2008). Marketers have therefore resorted to covert marketing, as opposed to overt marketing (Petty & Andrews, 2008; Wei, Fischer, & Main, 2008). When a blogger decides to not fully disclose a brand’s involvement in content of bloggers, it is characterized as covert marketing (Milne, Bahl, & Rohm, 2008).
Consumers trust information of other consumers better than information of sales persons (Wilson & Sherell, 1993). Means as electronic word-of-mouth (referred to as e-WOM hereafter) have therefore become increasingly important to companies (Fournier & Avery, 2011). One tool that enables this information stream is a blogger. In fashion blogs are no longer an alternative to traditional forms of marketing. With this, fashion bloggers have become concerned with monetary deals rather than the authenticity of the information (Liljander, Gummerus, & Söderlund, 2015). This technique is referred to as blog sponsorship, where bloggers are acting on behalf of third parties (Carr & Hayes, 2014). Although such deals increase referral likelihood (Ryu & Feick, 2007), they also entail a social risk. It may results in consumers’ scepticism (Tuk, Verlegh, Smidts, & Wigboldus, 2009). Sprague and Wells (2010) present an on going problem; if a consumers recognizes sponsorship, the comments are less likely to be viewed as credible, however if one does not disclose they are potentially deceiving their followers.
However, in 2009 the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that sponsorship must be disclosed due to concerns about consumers not being able to resist a brand’s persuasion (Petty & Andrews, 2008). FTC stressed the fact that referrals should be accompanied by a disclosure. This prompts the question whether
disclosure influences the effectiveness of sponsored blog posts. Theories on persuasion knowledge have already indicated that overt marketing does not necessarily lead to a decrease in behavioral compliances (Abenroth & Heyman, 2013; Carl, 2008). However, research to covert marketing and its effects still remains unclear (Liljander et al., 2015). In the current research, I examine the impact of these types of marketing on consumers’ responses toward sponsored blog posts and provide insight into the process that underlies these responses in covert and overt marketing.
Kim (2016) claims that research on the topic as to how bloggers should disclose sponsorship is much needed. Bloggers as content creators, use storytelling to convey their personal life to their bloggers (Ramos-Serrano & Martínez-García, 2016), which is called narrative marketing. The current research examines whether storytelling can influence the relationship of disclosure on e-WOM and responds to question as to how bloggers should communicate with their followers.
I argue that overt marketing, and not covert marketing, leads to more e-WOM because consumers have more persuasion knowledge. I also argue that using storytelling will further enhance this effect. To summarize, I contribute to literature in two ways. First, I address a different outcome of the persuasion knowledge model. Only few studies have addressed a positive effect of activating persuasion knowledge in overt marketing (Sah, Malavyia, & Thompson, 2015). Also, a limited number of studies on blogging have investigated covert marketing (Liljander et al., 2015). Furthermore, few studies have recognized that covert marketing is often suspected, especially by the younger generation, who know how blog marketing works (Liljander et al., 2015). Thus, contributing to existing studies is of utmost importance since scholars have to understand that persuasion knowledge works different in the current blogosphere. Second, little is known about how to attenuate the negative
effect of covert marketing on e-WOM, this study intends to solve this gap in literature.
Marketers as well as bloggers will benefit of the results of this study. Bloggers will benefit in the sense that they will improve their trustworthiness by expressing disclosure using storytelling. Considerate amount of studies have studied Facebook, although few studies examined Instagram as a starting point (Carah & Shaul, 2016; Alshawaf & Wen, 2015). This study will explore the use of Instagram to channel uses of real-world spaces versus fabricated reality, as was recommended by Abendroth and Heyman (2013).
The main aim of this study is to explore the way in which a follower of a blogger on Instagram decides on forwarding information and the factors influencing this. This topic has been chosen because it combines two challenging issues: (1) the need to explore the outcome of the persuasion knowledge model; and (2) the increasingly expansion of Instagram and its bloggers as an advertising medium. I have channelled the main objectives of this study through the following research question:
How does storytelling in a sponsored blog post relate to electronic word-of-mouth of a bloggers’ followers when bloggers use covert marketing or overt marketing on Instagram?
Theoretical Framework Sponsored blog posts
Marketers have used the influence of blogs to their advantage; companies advertise more and more through blogs to reach potential customers (Hsu & Lin, 2008; Rosen, 2000). Blogs are becoming the leading influencers for today’s web user, they are more effective in reaching consumers than other online and traditional advertising (Zhu & Tan, 2007). Blogs represent an ideal tool for e-WOM, as consumers can freely create brand-related information in their networks (Kulmala, Mesiranta & Tuominen, 2013). Personal recommendations are considered strongest of
all consumer triggers, because they come from a trusted source rather than a corporate source (Sprague & Wells, 2010), blogs are thus perceived as more credible and trustworthy (Akehurst, 2009). Instagram is a platform for these personal recommendations. What is more, it is one the most important photo sharing social networking services bloggers use to keep their followers updated (Ramos-Serrano & Martínez-García, 2016). Instagram is a mobile app that enables users to turn their mobile pictures into visual images. This platform has over 400 million monthly active users (Instagram, 2016). It, furthermore, endures a large commercial interest; with 70% of its users searching for a brand and 37% of them use Instagram to follow between 1 and 5 brands. Bloggers use Instagram to maintain a more intimate contact with their followers and provide exclusive information (Ramos-Serrano & Martínez-García, 2016). Moreover, fashion bloggers are more active on Instagram than on any other medium (Carah & Shaul, 2016). It has thus become an ideal platform for building global digital reputation (Alshawaf & Wen, 2015).
Bloggers have grown out of being ordinary writers and are opinion leaders (Mendoza, 2010). They are individuals within a reference group who hold influence over others due to knowledge, personality or special skills (Ho, Chiu, Chen, & Papazafeiropoulou, 2015). Opinion leaders exercise a greater influence on people’s opinions than mass media do (Ramos-Serrano & Martínez-García, 2016). Also, they influence others, who influence others at the same time. This is typically called e-WOM, such as online forwarding and online chatting (Acar & Polonsky, 2007). Henning-Thurau et al. (2004) defined e-WOM as ‘any positive or negative statement
made by potential, actual, or former customers about a product or company, which is made available to a multitude of people and institutions through internet’ (p.39).
passing. The latter is the one used in this study. Opinion-passing behavior is online
forwarding and passing that facilitates the flow of information (Sun, Youn, Wu, & Kuntaraporn, 2006). This paper therefore recognizes e-WOM as endorsement, and adopts the definition of Bernritter, Verlegh, & Smit (2016), consumers’ online brand endorsement is seen as an online behavior, where consumers interact with brands which is public, positive and perceived by others. E-WOM on Instagram specifically means likability (liking a post), engagement (commenting on post), and hash tags (Carah & Shaul, 2016; Alshawaf & Wen, 2015). This in turn is appealing for marketers.
The latter manifests itself in third-party sponsorship, wherein a blogger is hired to be the spokesperson of a brand, and confirms the identity of the brand (Wang, 2005). As pointed out by Tutaj and Reijmersdal (2012), ‘the boundaries of editorial and commercial content are blurring’. Kulmala et al. (2015) found that blogger-initiated and marketer-blogger-initiated content in fashion blogs were similarly presented. This means that it is harder for consumers to recognize sponsored content and editorial content (King, Racherla, & Bush, 2014). Although bloggers are requested by the FTC to reveal sponsorship, not everyone does so (Carl, 2008). The difference between covert and overt marketing is therefore difficult for consumers to detect (Liljander et al., 2015). Covert marketing is practiced when marketers decide to not fully disclose the brand’s involvement (Milne et al., 2008). Liljander et al. (2015) define covert marketing as occurring when consumers do not recognise that a recommendation is sponsored by a firm. Petty and Andrews (2008) name such marketing ‘masked’ marketing and define that as ‘marketing communications that appear not to be
marketing communication’ (p. 7). The commercial intention in such communications
is involved in the creation of the content (Liljander et al., 2015). Petty and Andrews (2008) define overt marketing as a way of communicating where consumers know the communication originates directly from the marketer.
Blog sponsorship disclosure and persuasion knowledge
The Persuasion Knowledge Model (PKM) states that consumers develop knowledge about the persuasion attempt to influence them and accordingly methods for coping with such an attempt (Friestad & Wright, 1994). The revelation that a blogger is paid by the brand should alert the blog readers to the fact that a blogger has withheld that information. The theory of persuasion knowledge is an underlying mechanism and provides several conditions under which consumer can successfully resist persuasion (Friestad & Wright, 1994). The theory suggests that when individuals are aware of the persuasion attempt, they may use their persuasion
knowledge to cope with the attempt. Persuasion knowledge is defined as the tactics
used in persuasion that can help individuals cope with persuasive efforts (Friestad & Wright, 1994).
It is widely accepted that persuasion knowledge lowers brand evaluations in product placement situation (Milne, Rohm, & Bahl, 2009). Also, it has often been claimed that revealing that one is paid for a sponsored blog post will lead to a decrease in brand attitude, because it activates persuasion knowledge (Campbell, Mohr, & Verlegh, 2012; Wei et al., 2008; Hardesty, Bearden, & Carlson, 2007). Traditionally, PKM would also suggest that such a reason would lead to perceiving the source as less sincere (Friestad & Wright, 1994). Multiple studies have recognized that disclosure of sponsorship leads to a negative change in attitude (Boerman, Reijmersdal, & Neijens, 2012; Campbell et al., 2012), however only few have recognized that it leads to a positive outcome (Sah et al., 2015). Bambauer-Sachse and Mangold (2013) actually argue that providing consumers with persuasion
knowledge does not have a negative effect in case of positive reviews. Other authors have argued that bloggers should take a different approach; they should be transparent when being paid for promoting a brand (Abendroth and Heyman, 2013). Sah et al. (2015) argue that disclosure increases (and not decreases) trust in the blogger. The authors present two reasons for this: (1) trust is enhanced because knowing that a blogger is sponsored by a company signals expertise of the blogger, and (2) it shows that a blogger is respected and established in his/her domain. Colliander and Erlandsson (2015) studied disclosed brand recommendation in blogs and also found that overt marketing did not lead to a decrease in behavioral outcomes, but positive due to the fact that the blogger was still seen as an expert. Carl (2008) has also argued the same principle; when a person discloses, agents were rated as more credible, and consequently leads to more e-WOM.
The latter studies suggest that overt and covert marketing do not operate as traditionally expected. Nowadays, blog readers may suspect covert marketing (Liljander et al., 2015). Moreover, consumers become suspicious of a blogger’s motives if they expect external reasons for it. The target group of Instagram (generation Y: young consumers) more than often knows when a post is sponsored (Liljander et al., 2015). In general, consumers become more aware of product placements (Lee, Sung, & de Gregorio, 2011).
Thus, it is well known among consumers that bloggers mix editorial content with commercial content, as well as that bloggers are paid for their posts (Kim, 2016). It has also been recognized that covert marketing leads to a consumers’ skepticism as to their persuasive intent and are simply seen as unethical, consequently blog readers will reject the persuasive message (Petty & Andrews, 2008), it also decreases trust in the blogger and the brand (Ashley & Leonard, 2009). Covert marketing will lead to
less e-WOM due to rejection of the persuasive intent. To summarize the above, it is believed that the younger consumers (generation Y), will not be negatively influenced by overt marketing. Younger consumers suspect covert marketing due to their experience with blog marketing (Liljander et al., 2015). Consumers’ suspicion of covert marketing seems to have a negative on the credibility of the bloggers, as well as on e-WOM, because it is perceived as deceptive. This study thus argues that overt marketing leads to an increase in e-WOM for two reasons; the blog readers’ knowledge of blog marketing (Liljander et al., 2015), and the blogger signals expertise (Colliander & Erlandsson, 2015). I propose that in overt marketing, consumers have more intention to forward information (e-WOM), regarding the product recommended by the blogger.
Hypothesis 1: Overt marketing will lead to more electronic word-of-mouth versus covert marketing in sponsored blog post onInstagram.
Persuasion knowledge in this study is divided into two dimensions: conceptual persuasion knowledge (CPK) and attitudinal persuasion knowledge (APK). CPK is about the recognition of advertising and APK is about the attitudes such as honesty, trustworthiness and credibility of the content (Boerman et al., 2012). As mentioned before, multiple studies found a negative effect of disclosure due to persuasion knowledge. As a consequence of this learning, a consumer’s trust and the credibility of the blogger would decrease (Friestad & Wright, 1994). However Carl (2008) revised the model, arguing a different process. He argued that perceptions of trustworthiness and goodwill were actually higher in overt marketing. He, furthermore, presented two reasons for this. First, a relationship exists between blogger and blog reader, there for a blogger builds up goodwill. As a consequence, a blog reader will not care about the persuasive intent because of the predisposition that
the blogger is trustworthy. Second, overt marketing is seen as a marker of honesty and credibility. This means that the blog reader appreciates that the blogger is not deceptive (Carl, 2008). Being open and authentic (overt marketing) will lead to an activation of persuasion knowledge as well. APK includes mechanisms such as honesty and credibility, and are believed to be effective in coping with advertising. APK involves criticial feelings about honesty, trustworthiness, and credibility. Sponsorship disclosure may affect APK, in the sense that overt marketing is seen as credible and honest and will thus lower the critical feelings of APK. This awareness can make the follower less critical toward the sponsored blog post.
The current study thus argues that APK will lead to an increase in behavioural intentions, due to the predisposition that a blogger is credible, honest and authentic and consequently lowers the critical feelings toward the blog post. In overt marketing the blogger will be seen as authentic, whereas covert marketing he or she is seen as deceitful. Consequently, I argue that the awereness in overt marketing leads to more e-WOM. The effect of disclosure on e-WOM is than partially caused by the perception of the consumers of a blogger’s honesty and authenticity. However, when covert marketing is used, critical feelings are not lowered, in contrast they are higher. This can be explained by the reactance theory (Brehm, 1966). According to this theory, people desire to maintain their freedom, and do not want to be manipulated, they will thus oppose the persuasive intent due to the critical feelings.
This study thus recognizes that overt and covert marketing will lead to an activation of persuasion knowledge, however overt marketing will lead to a decrease in APK (critical feelings) and covert marketing to an increase in APK (critical feelings).
Hypothesis 2: APK mediates the relationship of disclosure on e-WOM, in the sense that when using overt marketing it is seen as honest and consequently critical feelings are lower but e-WOM is higher. When using covert marketing, it seen as deceitful, and will consequently lead to more critical and less e-WOM.
Blog sponsorship and Storytelling
Storytelling can be defined as the “sharing of knowledge and experiences through narrative and anecdote in order to communicate lessons, complex ideas, concepts, and causal connections” (Sole & Gray-Wilson, 1999, p. 6). Stories create strong direct connections to consumers, moreover if facilitates a reciprocal relationship and the corresponding consumers ‘loyalty (Ågren & Ölund, 2007).
To maintain a trustworthy relationship with their followers, a blogger should balance promotional messages with their character narrative. It is important to match the blogger’s character to cultural message. This in turn should translate into a story relevant to their followers (Kozinets et al., 2010). Kretz and de Valck (2010) have also mentioned the importance of branded storytelling with arranged visual and textual elements to place brands in the plots of characters. They further mention that bloggers should find a balance between audience expectations (authenticity and trustworthiness) and marketer expectations. Narrative transportation is one of many solutions for this issue and the on-going problem of disclosing sponsorship (being authentic and trustworthy). This is called narrative marketing, which is a way to increase consumers’ trust and feelings of strong emotional involvement, it is furthermore related to e-WOM (Ferrari, 2015).
The current study will explain the latter through narrative transportation. A blogger can exert influence on their followers through narrative transportation versus giving factual information, that is, by transporting consumers into the world of a
brand narrative. Both are processed differently (Padgett & Allen, 1997). An ad with narrative cues is typically processed in a narrative form, whereas factual cues are processed in an analytical form of processing. Ads are considered to be narrative if they include “actors with motives, an event sequence and a setting that has physical, social, and temporal components” (Padgett & Allen, 1997). Meaning, that it is chronically and casually related sequence of events to portray how one or several characters consume, use, or create a product service. A narrative, or a story, always implies some essential elements: (1) the plot – sequential events –;(2) characters; (3) climax; (4) outcome (Van Laer, De Ruyter, Visconti, & Wetzels, 2014). Factual cues, on the other hand, communicate information about the features of a product or service in a direct, logical and fact-based manner. Importantly, they do not evolve around a characters or is told in a chronically or sequential manner (Padgett & Allen, 1997).
Stories create and strengthen consumers’ relationship with the brand by providing a theme for conversation (e-WOM) between consumers and firms and among consumers themselves (Gensler, Völckner, Liu-Thompkins, & Wiertz, 2013). In these days, brand-generated stories attenuated in their effect. Currently, generated stories are of vital importance, especially to brands. These consumer-generated stories add to a firm’s pursued brand meaning (Gensler et al., 2013). One way to have a sort of influence in creating these stories is by using a blogger. Stories stimulate our imagination and elicit emotions (Spear & Roper, 2013). The process of a story telling work as follows; most of our knowledge is stored as a story, when incoming information is transmitted as a story it is thus easier to understand, and consequently the message is easier to evaluate (Green, 2008). This process will lead to narrative transportation, which is explained as “a state of cognitive, emotional and
consumers lose themselves in a story, their attitudes and intention change to reflect that story. Readers in such as state are easier influenced (Green, 2008). Furthermore, the state of narrative transportation makes the world before the story inaccessible, describing a clear separation of here/there and now/before causing consumers to lose track of reality. In this state marketers are able to reconstruct reality and consequently cause profound persuasion (Van Laer et al., 2014). What is more, when a story is told people pay more attention, organize and story the information in their memory and compare it to existing beliefs and values in mind, hereby brand attitude and behavioral intentions (such as e-WOM) are influenced due to narrative transportation (Chiu, Hsieh, & Kuo, 2012).
When using narrative cues, people are transported into the narrative; it can be described as the experience of being carried away by the story. As a result, narrative cues will lead to more e-WOM than factual cues. However, the effect is different for overt than for covert marketing.
The negative attitude to covert marketing will be inaccessible due the extracted attention of the consumer by the blogger’s story. The negative effect from covert marketing will thus disappear due to narrative transportation and as a consequence forget the negative effect. When using factual cues, consumers will not be transported in the narrative, there is no narrative transportation, and therefore consumers will not forget the negative feeling of being exposed to covert marketing.
In overt marketing, narrative cues will lead to more e-WOM as well, but because of the existing positive predisposition to the blogger, narrative cues will not necessarily lead to a considerable amount of more e-WOM. So I expect that e-WOM will increase in overt marketing due to narrative transportation, but I expect this effect to be lower for overt marketing than for covert marketing due to the existing positive
predisposition to the blogger. When using factual cues in overt marketing, consumers are still influenced by the positive effect, it will thus not lead to less e-WOM. Moreover, when using factual cues people are not transported into the narrative, it will to not lead to more e-WOM .
Following this line of reasoning, this study assumes an interaction effect; that the e-WOM differs when bloggers post use narrative cues (versus factual cues) and differs as well when using covert and overt marketing. I therefore propose the following:
Hypothesis 3: In overt marketing the effect of narrative cues (versus factual cues) will not differ. However in covert marketing the effect between narrative cues (versus factual cues) will differ, and will cause the negative effect of covert marketing on e-WOM turn into a positive effect.
Accordingly, I propose the following conceptual model.
Method
To test the hypotheses, an online experiment on Qualtrics was conducted, which followed a 2 (Sponsorship; covert marketing and overt marketing) x 2 (Consumer-generated stories; narrative and factual) between subjects design. In this between subjects design, subjects were randomly assigned to one of the conditions. Sponsorship was classified into two types: a blog post that honestly reveals being sponsored by a company (overt marketing) and a blog post that does not honestly reveal being sponsored by a company (covert marketing). Whereas storytelling was classified into a blog post that explains the benefits of the product by means of a story (narrative cues) and a blog post where the benefits of the product are explained by facts (factual cues). Decided was to control for source credibility and brand involvement. The perceived credibility of the source is believed to be a primary determinant of subsequent behaviour (Liljander et al., 2015); it has furthermore been linked to several positive consequences, such as behavioural compliance. It is believed that the receiver of e-WOM is affected by the characteristics of the receiver. Multiple studies resulted confirm the believe that source credibility is an important determinant of e-WOM (Cheung, Lee, & Rabjohn, 2008; Hu, Liu, & Zhang, 2008). Blogger credibility might differ for overt and covert marketing, since covert marketing decreases consumer trust in the brand (Ashley & Leonard, 2009). Perceived credibility of the blogger will therefore be controlled for because of its potential to influence the relationship of disclosure on purchase intention and e-WOM.
Sample
Participants were recruited from the Instagram of a famous blogger, named Wendy van Soest. Her instagram count over 50,000 followers, expected was to reach 20,000 of these followers with an Instagram post on her page. Participants were lured with
the chance of winning a photo shoot with a renounced photographer. The target audience were female between 15 and 35 years old with an Instagram account. In the end 206 people participated in the experiment, 173 participants were included in the data analysis. There were several reasons to exclude a participant. First, participants were removed if they were statistical outliers. I identified 3 outliers (i.e. cases with a 𝑧 score greater than 3.29) and removed them (Iglewicz & Hoaglin, 1993). Second, participants were removed if they did not have Instagram or did not follow Wendy van Soest, this number was 18. Third, if they did not accept the agreements they were also excluded, this number was 4. This was done before I started the analysis.
The participants aged between 15 and 59 years old (M = 25,77, SD = 6,32) and 91% of the participants were female. The highest education completed by the participants ranged from did not complete high school to master’s degree. 2,3% of the participants (4 participants) did not complete high school, followed by 22% (38 participants) completed high school, another 17,3% (30 participants) completed college and 58,4% (101 participants) completed a bachelor’s or master’s degree. The sampling frame did not deviate from the target audience. The data can be obtained upon request.
Stimulus material and procedure
The context for this study is the fashion industry; an industry where it has become the norm for marketers to provide fashion bloggers with incentives such as free products, vouchers, discounts, invitations and money in attempt to gain some positive publicity (Corcoran, 2010). For the online experiment, an image of a real life blogger regarding the promotion of a watch from the brand Daniel Wellington was generated. I decided to use a watch brand to be featured in the post because I think it appeals to the target audience regardless of age or education. Daniel Wellington is a well-known brand,
differences in attitudes to the brand. In order to increase the realism of the experiment, we used the Instagram network of an existing famous blogger, Wendy van Soest. The blog post contained a review about the watch from Daniel Wellington. In order to ensure consistency across all treatments, each set of blog reviews will use the same layout graphics, and colours (See Appendix A).
Four types of blog posts were created for the experiment, one with overt marketing and one with covert marketing, with narrative cues and factual cues. The disclosure was placed in the beginning of the post. In the overt condition, the disclosure represents the blogger as being asked by the company to evaluate their product; also the post had multiple hash tags of the brand. It read as follows:
This blog post is sponsored by Daniel Wellington, they asked me to test their watch and I did.
In the covert condition, the disclosure was left out; furthermore it contained no hash tags or referrals to the brand, this presumably leads to the suspicion of covert marketing. I used the covert conditions as the control condition, as it allows for an analysis to determine the effect (if any) of disclosure. I followed to considerations for a clear and conspicuous disclosure as mentioned in the guidelines published by FTC (Federal Trade Commission, 2013): the disclosure should be placed in the beginning of the post, in order that is unavoidable for customers to not read it and there should be no distractions (other advertisements) placed in the post, and the language is understandable and appropriate for the audience.
The manipulation of narrative cues closely follows the procedure of a previous study (Polyorat, Alden, & Kim, 2007). The factual cues will make assertions about the benefits of the brand in a straightforward and factual manner. The narrative cues will communicate the same benefits, but will do so by using a short narrative that describes how the blogger use and embody these benefits when solving a difficult
problem. The narrative condition has a middle, beginning and an ending. Furthermore, it has multiple characters and focuses on specific events rather than on generalizations. The factual condition is used as the control conditions, as it allows for an analysis to determine the effect of narrative cues. In order to conceal the experiment’s objective, the individuals taking part will be told that this will be a study about successfulness of bloggers and how they evaluate the product afterwards.
For this study, approximately 20,000 people were be approached through Instagram, Facebook or e-mail to participate in the proposed experiment. Participants that accepted the task were redirected to Qualtrics (www.qualtrics.com), where the experiment and online survey was located. The experiment begun with an informed consent statement, and participants provided consent by clicking a proceed button. It was also indicated in which way respondents should answer the questions and that every question should be answered. It was indicated that everything is anonymous, and in case they want more information, they can contact me by e-mail. Respondents were alerted to the ethical side of the research; participating is voluntary, the results are only used for scientific ends and the data will be used in an anonymous way. The questionnaire was ethically tested and approved by the University of Amsterdam. After filling out the informed consent, they were automatically redirected via a randomizer script to view one of the four blog post images. They were then required to answer the survey questions containing the study measures (i.e. e-WOM, APK narrative transportation and source credibility). Once they complete the questionnaire, participants was provided with debriefing information, and thanked for their participation in the study (See Appendix B for complete questionnaire).
Measures
against four items. This construct includes a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (7). Four questions were included in this scale: I am willing to let other Internet users know that I am a customer of this product/company; I am willing to provide more positive online information about this product available to other Internet users; I am willing to positively discuss this product with other people on the Internet; I am willing to share positive information about this product with others on the internet. Furthermore, an updated a scale was added deriving from the study of Bernritter (2016). This scale was originally meant for Facebook, however both are social media with the same forwarding functions. The participants were asked to indicate their agreements using a four item seven-point scale (1 = very strongly disagree, 7 = very strongly agree) anchored by: “I would like
this brand on Instagram”, “I would like this post on Instagram”, “I would like to share this brand on Instagram”, “I would appreciate it, if content from DW would appear on my timeline on Instagram”. Reliability of the scale is good, Cronbach’s
alpha = .96, which could even be improved by dismissing the item “I would like this post on Instagram”. The Cronbach’s alpha = .98 after deleting the latter item, this could not be improved. Therefore, it appears the scale measures e-WOM. A mean scale with 6 items was thus created, named e-WOM, (M = 4.87, SD = 1.71).
Attitudinal persuasion knowledge. APK was measured using the scale of the study of Boerman et al. (2012), a five-item seven-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 =
strongly agree) was used, the participants were asked to indicate whether they agreed
with the statements: “I think the post is honest” (reversed), “I think the post is
trustworthy” (reversed), “I think the post is convincing” (reversed), “I think the post is biased”, and “I think the post is not credible”. High scores of APK correspond to
post. Reliability of the scale is good, Cronbach’s alpha = .89, which could not be improved. Therefore, it appears the scale measures APK. A mean scale with 5 items was thus created, named APK, (M = 2.54, SD = 1.57).
Manipulation check. For the purpose of manipulation check, two different variables will be measured. First, to check the manipulation of narrative and factual cues, we adopted the measurement used in the study of Escalas (2004). Using a four-point scale ranging from not at all to very much (1 = not at all, 4 = very much) participants were asked to indicate their agreements with seven statements including, “This blog
post is telling a story”, “This blog post is dramatic”, “This blog post consists of actors engaged in actions to achieve a goal”, “This blog post lets you know what the characters are thinking and feeling”, “This blog post provides you with change in the life of the character”, “This blog post has a beginning, middle and ending”, “This blog post focuses on specific events rather than on generalizations”. Reliability of the
scale is good, Cronbach’s alpha = .96, which could improved by deleting the item “this blog post is dramatic”, the improved Cronbach’s alpha = .97. It appears the scale is fit to check the manipulation of narrative cues. A mean scale was therefore created with 7 items, named manipulation_narrative, (M = 2.76, SD = 1.08). Additionally, it was checked if participants in the narrative conditions were indeed transported in the narrative. The reliability of this scale was good, Cronbach’s alpha = .96. A mean scale was therefore created with 11 items, named NT, (M = 4.53, SD = 1.95).
Another manipulation check will measure if overt marketing was seen as overt; participants will have to tick ‘yes’ when they perceive the sponsored blog post as if the blogger revealed they had received the brands’ support or ‘no’ when they perceive that the blogger does not get paid (Liljander et al., 2015). Participants that
tick ‘no’ will be removed from the study, this number was 11. The same process will be used for covert marketing.
Control variables. To ensure that any effects found in the experiment could not have been caused by possible differences between the groups, two control variables were included. Two covariates were measured: source credibility and brand involvement. Source credibility was tested using the scale of Ohanian (1990), but only two components out of three will be used: trustworthiness and expertise. In blogs, only expertise and trustworthiness have proven to be significant as main dimensions of source credibility (Liljander et al., 2015). In this section, respondents will be asked to rate their level of agreement on the credibility items regarding the blogger. Source credibility will be measured with an index composed out of 10 items following a five-point semantic scale: dependable/undependable, honest/dishonest, reliable/unreliable, sincere/insincere, trustworthy/untrustworthy, expert/ not an expert, experienced/not experienced, knowledgeable/unknowledgeable, qualified/unqualified, skilled/unskilled. The reliability of the scale is good, Cronbach’s alpha = .96, which could not improved. A mean scale with 10 items was therefore created, called SC (M = 4.12, SD = .86).
If there is a significant difference among treatment groups, these variables should be used as the covariate variables. To test the latter, a one-factor analysis was carried out to assess the influence of source credibility on disclosure. As for source credibility there is a significant difference among treatments groups, F(1, 169) = 23.66, p < .001, η2= .12.
Results Manipulation check
As the objective of the study is to examine the effect of type of disclosure on behavioral intentions, it was important that the participants understand the disclosure and narrative cues in the experimental groups.
One question checked the manipulation of disclosure. This question asked if participants recalled seeing the disclosure. It was determined that out of 87 participants in the overt marketing condition n= 86 remembered seeing the disclosure, while in the covert marketing, out of 86 participants, n= 74 noticed that the blog post did not involve a disclosure. A participant was removed if she/he clicked the wrong marketing. If a participant clicked maybe (n= 13) he/she was not removed. Making a total of the actual sample of N = 173 participants.
A one-factor analysis of variance was carried out to test the manipulation of storytelling. The results show a significant, strong effect among the subjects, F (1, 169) = 239.24, p < .001, η2 = .59. Which means that the two groups answered in significantly different ways. Narrative cues are indeed perceived as narrative cues, whereas factual cues are indeed perceived as factual cues. Another one factor analysis of variance was carried out to test the if participant were indeed transported in the narrative. The results show a significant, strong effect among the subjects, F (1, 169) = 210.18, p < .001, η2 = .55. Which means that there were differences in narrative transportation, “Subjects who were told a story were more highly transported in the narrative (M = 5.95, SD = 1.40) while those who were not told a story were lower transported in the story (M = 3.06, SD = 1.19).
Disclosure and e-WOM
the subjects of exposure to the sponsored blog post on the respondent’s intention to forward (e-WOM), F (1, 169) = 141.72, p < .001, η2 = .46. “Subjects who had seen the blog post with overt marketing have more intention to forward information (M = 5.89, SD = 0.99) compared to those who were exposed to covert marketing (M = -3.31, SD = 1.75), providing support for H1. The results can be found in table 1. Table 1. Means and standard deviations disclosure on e-WOM.
Variable Covert Marketing (n=84) Overt marketing (n=87)
M SD M SD
e-WOM 3.31 a 1.75 5.89 a .99
Note. Means across conditions that share superscript differ at p < .001. Questions are
anchored by (1= strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).
The second hypotheses assessed whether a mediation effect existed between disclosure and e-WOM through APK. To test this, I used a regression analysis. In figure 2, the effect is portrayed. It, was checked if a moderation exists, first the relationship of (a) was tested, consequently of (b) and also of (c) and (c’) (Baron & Kenny, 1986). (a), b* = 0.82, t = 3.54, p < .001, 95% CI [1.28, .36], and (b), b* = -.62, t = -7.75, p < .001, 95% CI [-.78, -.47], (c) b* = 2.58, t = 11.91, p < .001, 95% CI [2.15, 3.01] all have a significant effect. The regression model with e-WOM as dependent variable, disclosure as independent variable and APK as mediating variable is significant (c’), F(2, 168) = 179.87, p < .001. The regression model can therefore be used to predict intention to endorse information (e-WOM), the strength is strong 57.60 per cent of the variation in e-WOM can be predicted on the basis of disclosure and APK (R2 = .58). Disclosure, b* = 2.22, t = 11.16, p < .001, 95% CI [1.83, 2.61],
b* = -.44, t = -6.90, p < .001, 95% CI [-.56, -.31] have a significant and influences
unstandardized regression coefficients do differ, that’s why I argue a partial mediation effect.
Figure 2. Mediation effect of disclosure on e-WOM.
A Sobel test should confirm this finding. The test indicated a significant result, c = 1.71, p < .001; b’ = 1.29, ns; Sobel’s Z = 2.49, p < .05. This means that the effect of disclosure on e-WOM is partially caused by APK. Providing support for H2.
Storytelling
To test the third and final hypotheses another ANOVA was performed. I hypothesized that using narrative cues (versus factual cues) have a positive effect on e-WOM in the overt condition, but even has a greater effect on e-WOM and purchase intention in the covert condition. A two factor analysis was carried out to assess the influence of disclosure on e-WOM, in conjunction with the effect of storytelling. Two significant main effects were found. I found a significant, moderate effect of disclosure on e-WOM, F (1, 167) = 116.41, p < .001, η2 = .33. Also, I found another significant, moderate effect of storytelling on e-WOM, F (1, 167) = 117.56, p < .001, η2 = .33. Therefore, it was checked whether an interaction effect exists. A significant, but weak interaction effect was found of storytelling and disclosure on e-WOM,
F(1,167) = 17.01, p < .001, η2= .09. The means of these effects are presented in table
Table 2. Moderation effect of narrative cues on the effect of disclosure on e-WOM and purchase intention.
Covert (n=84) Overt (n=87)
Disclosure Storytelling M SD M SD
e-WOM Factual 2.83a 1.68 5.23a .65
Narrative 5.24 a .80 6.14a 1.28
Note. Means across conditions that do not share superscript differ at p < .01.
Questions are anchored by (1= strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).
Figure 2. Line graph portraying the interaction effect of disclosure and narrative on
electronic word-of-mouth.
After close inspection of the latter graphs, it indeed seems that the effect of disclosure on behavioral intentions is greater for covert marketing than for overt marketing when using narrative cues instead of factual cues. When looking at table 2 it seems that when in case of covert marketing e-WOM will increase more when a blogger use storytelling, versus overt marketing, providing support for H3. Conclusion
2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6 6,5 Covert Overt Factual Narrative
Due to the increasing use of blog sponsorship as an advertising technique (Kozinets et al., 2010), FTC requires sponsorship in blogs to be disclosed to ensure fair and open communication between advertisers and consumers (FTC, 2013). The objective of a disclosure is to inform followers to the persuasive intent in sponsored blog post, which allows them to distinguish editorial from commercial content (Boerman et al., 2012). This study took the persuasion knowledge model as an anchor point, however it argued a positive effect of persuasion knowledge instead of a negative effect. Furthermore, it researched how to positively enhance the effects of covert marketing. With that in mind, the main aim of this study was to examine effect of sponsorship disclosure (overt marketing and covert marketing) on behavioral intentions (e-WOM) via persuasion knowledge in blogs through an online experiment. Furthermore, the effect of storytelling was studied. The outcomes of the study may provide beneficial insights for marketers as well as bloggers.
Analyses of the findings demonstrate that overt marketing leads to more e-WOM in comparison to covert marketing. This finding is in line with the notion that people appreciate honest and authentic content (Sah et al., 2015). It is, thus, important for bloggers to reveal that a company sponsors them. If they fail to do so, e-WOM activities will be lower. This in turn, is not beneficial for brands. Bloggers receive monetary and product deals in turn for e-WOM (Liljander et al., 2015). For most blogger it is thus of utmost importance that they use overt marketing and covert marketing.
Furthermore, the latter mentioned effect is partially explained by attitudinal persuasion knowledge. Items measuring this variable were: “I think the blog post is honest” and “I think the blog post is trustworthy”. This study shows that APK indeed serves as a mediator between disclosure and e-WOM. Also, it showed a negative
effect of APK, meaning that when a blogger uses overt marketing, APK lowers in effect, this in turn means that consumers have less critical feelings. As a consequence of those feelings consumers will have more intention to forward information (e-WOM). This finding is very interesting, since Friestad & Wright (1994) have argued a different effect. They expected that APK was higher in overt marketing than in covert marketing, meaning that people see overt marketing as more trustworthy, implying that followers of a blogger indeed feel like the blog is more trustworthy when using covert marketing instead of covert marketing. What is more, the results of disclosure on CPK was found to be non-significant, which means that consumers are very much aware that bloggers are paid for their posts, they notice this even when a blogger uses covert marketing.
In answer to the need to study enhance the understanding of covert marketing (Liljander et al., 2015), this study investigated how disclosure can attenuate in effect. The significant interaction effect of disclosure and narrative proposes that posting in a narrative way enhances the effectiveness of both conditions, however it enhances the covert condition more than the overt marketing. This corresponds to the narrative transportation theory, which implies that when reading a story people are transported into the narrative, they forget their initial attitudes in the process.
Overall, this study showed that overt marketing is the best thing in blog sponsorship marketing. Also, bloggers have to realize this effect to e-WOM is partially explained by their honesty and credibility. Furthermore, should they decide on covert marketing, they should storytelling. However, the results indicate that storytelling is always good to use.
References
Abendroth, L. J., & Heyman, J. E. (2013). Honesty is the best policy: The effects of disclosure in word-of-mouth marketing. Journal of Marketing Communications,
19(4), 245-257.
Acar, A. S., & Polonsky, M. (2007). Online social networks and insights into marketing communications. Journal of Internet Commerce, 6(4), 55-72.
Ågren, M., & Ölund, M. (2007). Storytelling: A study of marketing communication in the hospitality industry.
Akehurst, G. (2009). User generated content: the use of blogs for tourism organisations and tourism consumers. Service Business, 3(1), 51-61.
Alshawaf, E., & Wen, L. (2015). Understanding Digital Reputation on Instagram: A Case Study of Social Media Mavens. In Proceedings of the 2nd European
Conference on Social Media 2015: ECSM 2015 (p. 19). Academic
Conferences Limited.
Ashley, C., & Leonard, H. A. (2009). Betrayed by the buzz? Covert content and consumer-brand relationships. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 28(2), 212-220.
Bambauer-Sachse, S., & Mangold, S. (2013). Do consumers still believe what is said in online product reviews? A persuasion knowledge approach. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, 20(4), 373-381.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173. Bernritter, S. F., Verlegh, P. W., & Smit, E. G. (2016). Why nonprofits are easier to
endorse on social media: The roles of warmth and brand symbolism. Journal
of Interactive Marketing, 33, 27-42.
Boerman, S. C., Reijmersdal, E. A., & Neijens, P. C. (2012). Zijn sponsorvermeldingen in televisieprogramma's effectief?. Tijdschrift voor
Communicatiewetenschap, 40(4), 46.
Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York: Academic Press.
Campbell, M. C., Mohr, G., & Verlegh, P. W. (2012). Can disclosures lead consumers to resist covert persuasion? The important roles of disclosure timing and type of response. Journal of Consumer Psychology, Forthcoming.
Carah, N., & Shaul, M. (2016). Brands and Instagram: Point, tap, swipe, glance.
Mobile Media & Communication, 4(1), 69-84.
Carl, W. J. (2008). The role of disclosure in organized word-of-mouth marketing programs. Journal of Marketing Communications, 14(3), 225-241.
Carr, C. T., & Hayes, R. A. (2014). The Effect of Disclosure of Third-Party Influence on an Opinion Leader's Credibility and Electronic Word of Mouth in Two-Step Flow. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 14(1), 38-50.
Cheung, C. M., Lee, M. K., & Rabjohn, N. (2008). The impact of electronic word-of-mouth: The adoption of online opinions in online customer communities.
Internet Research, 18(3), 229-247.
Chiu, H. C., Hsieh, Y. C., & Kuo, Y. C. (2012). How to align your brand stories with your products. Journal of Retailing, 88(2), 262-275.
Colliander, J., & Erlandsson, S. (2015). The blog and the bountiful: Exploring the effects of disguised product placement on blogs that are revealed by a third party. Journal of Marketing Communications, 21(2), 110-124.
Ferrari, S. (2015). Storytelling and narrative marketing in the era of social media. In Deliyannis, I. Experimental Multimedia Systems for Interactivity and Strategic
Innovation (p. 1-15). Hershey, Pennsylvania: IGI Global Publication.
Fournier, S., & Avery, J. (2011). The uninvited brand. Business Horizons, 54(3), 193-207.
Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of consumer research, 1-31.
Gensler, S., Völckner, F., Liu-Thompkins, Y., & Wiertz, C. (2013). Managing brands in the social media environment. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27(4), 242-256.
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of personality and social psychology, 79(5), 701. NARRATIVE TRANSPORTATION SCALE.
Green, M. C. (2008). Research challenges in narrative persuasion. Information Design
Journal, 16(1), 47-52.
Hardesty, D. M., Bearden, W. O., & Carlson, J. P. (2007). Persuasion knowledge and consumer reactions to pricing tactics. Journal of Retailing, 83(2), 199-210. Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004). Electronic
word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the Internet?. Journal of interactive marketing,
18(1), 38-52.
Ho, C. H., Chiu, K. H., Chen, H., & Papazafeiropoulou, A. (2015). Can Internet blogs be used as an effective advertising tool? The role of product blog type and brand awareness. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(3), 346-362.
Hsu, C. L., & Lin, J. C. C. (2008). Acceptance of blog usage: The roles of technology acceptance, social influence and knowledge sharing motivation. Information
& management, 45(1), 65-74.
Hu, N., Liu, L., & Zhang, J. J. (2008). Do online reviews affect product sales? The role of reviewer characteristics and temporal effects. Information Technology
and Management, 9(3), 201-214.
Iglewicz, B., & Hoaglin, D. C. (1993). How to detect and handle outliers (Vol. 16). Asq Press.
Instagram. (2016). Instagram.com. Retrieved 14 June 2016, from
https://www.instagram.com/press/.
Kulmala, M., Mesiranta, N., & Tuominen, P. (2013). Organic and amplified eWOM in consumer fashion blogs. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management:
An International Journal, 17(1), 20-37.
Kim, K. K. (Ed.). (2016). Celebrating America’s Pastimes: Baseball, Hot Dogs,
Apple Pie and Marketing?: Proceedings of the 2015 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference. Springer.
King, R. A., Racherla, P., & Bush, V. D. (2014). What we know and don't know about online word-of-mouth: A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal
of Interactive Marketing, 28(3), 167-183.
Kozinets, R. V., De Valck, K., Wojnicki, A. C., & Wilner, S. J. (2010). Networked narratives: Understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities.
Journal of marketing, 74(2), 71-89.
Kretz, G., & de Valck, K. (2013). Fashion Blogging. The Routledge Companion to
Lee, T., Sung, Y., & de Gregorio, F. (2011). Cross-cultural challenges in product placement. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 29(4), 366-384.
Liljander, V., Gummerus, J., & Söderlund, M. (2015). Young consumers’ responses to suspected covert and overt blog marketing. Internet Research, 25(4), 610-632.
Mendoza, M. (2010). I Blog. You Buy. How bloggers are creating a new generation of product endorsers. Digital Research & Publishing, 114-122.
Milne, G. R., Bahl, S., & Rohm, A. (2008). Toward a framework for assessing covert marketing practices. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 27(1), 57-62. Milne, G. R., Rohm, A., & Bahl, S. (2009). If It's Legal, Is It Acceptable?. Journal of
Advertising, 38(4), 107-122.
Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers' perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of
advertising, 19(3), 39-52.
Padgett, D., & Allen, D. (1997). Communicating experiences: A narrative approach to creating service brand image. Journal of advertising, 26(4), 49-62.
Petty, R. D., & Andrews, J. C. (2008). Covert marketing unmasked: A legal and regulatory guide for practices that mask marketing messages. Journal of
Public Policy & Marketing, 27(1), 7-18.
Polyorat, K., Alden, D. L., & Kim, E. S. (2007). Impact of narrative versus factual print ad copy on product evaluation: The mediating role of ad message involvement. Psychology & Marketing, 24(6), 539-554.
Ramos-Serrano, M., & Martínez-García, Á. (2016). Personal style bloggers: the most popular visual composition principles and themes on instagram. Observatorio
(OBS*), 10(2).
Rosen, E. (2000). The Anatomy of Buzz: How to Create Word of Mouth Marketing. London: Harper Collins Business.
Ryu, G., & Feick, L. (2007). A penny for your thoughts: Referral reward programs and referral likelihood. Journal of Marketing, 71(1), 84-94.
Sah, S., Malavyia, P., & Thompson, D. (2015). "Persuasive Experts Do It With Disclosure! the Perverse Impact of Conflict of Interest Disclosures in Consumer Blogs". Advances in Consumer Research Volume, 43, 713-714. Spear, S., & Roper, S. (2013). Using corporate stories to build the corporate brand: an
impression management perspective. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 22(7), 491-501.
Sprague, R., & Wells, M. E. (2010). Regulating online buzz marketing: Untangling a web of deceit. American Business Law Journal, 47(3), 415-454.
Sole, D., & Gray Wilson, D. (1999). Storytelling in Organizations: The power and traps of using stories to share knowledge in organizations. LILA: Harvard University.
Sun, T., Youn, S., Wu, G., & Kuntaraporn, M. (2006). Online word-of-mouth (or mouse): An exploration of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(4), 1104-1127.
Tuk, M. A., Verlegh, P. W., Smidts, A., & Wigboldus, D. H. (2009). Sales and sincerity: The role of relational framing in word-of-mouth marketing. Journal
of Consumer Psychology, 19(1), 38-47.
Van Laer, T., De Ruyter, K., Visconti, L. M., & Wetzels, M. (2014). The extended transportation-imagery model: A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of consumers’ narrative transportation. Journal of Consumer
Wang, A. (2005). The effects of expert and consumer endorsements on audience response. Journal of Advertising Research, 45(4), 402-412.
Wei, M. L., Fischer, E., & Main, K. J. (2008). An examination of the effects of activating persuasion knowledge on consumer response to brands engaging in covert marketing. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 27(1), 34-44.
Zhu, J., & Tan, B. (2007). Effectiveness of blog advertising: Impact of communicator expertise, advertising intent, and product involvement. ICIS 2007
Proceedings, 121.
APPENDIX A. Stimulus materials (blog post images)
Blog post image 1: overt marketing
The two images used in the blog post in the online experiment are same in format and length, with exception of the type of disclosure. The disclosure is placed in the beginning of the blog post, and in this post the disclosure is as follows:
This blog post is sponsored by Daniel Wellington, they asked me to test their watch and I did.
Blog post image 2: No disclosure
“Pick up your watch to get ready for the week. Everyone is different and these watches come in a variety of styles and sizes, so chances are there is one that will fit you perfectly. They are designed to be sexy and fashionable as well as very comfortable. All the watches are made from high quality fabric and use the best clocks, even after a year it still looks good. The watches are available in basic designs as well fashionable designs. So think about this one before you buy your next watch. With this watch, you’re truly ready to go anywhere you want.”
“Imagine yourself enjoying the comfy feeling of sun, you know that wearing this watch makes you look just right. You close your eyes and you see your lover walking toward you and you don’t have a care in the world. You like its professional design that isn’t only sexy and fashionable but is comfortable as well. Meeting a guy is always a happening that is quite nerve racking, they’re challenging for every woman. But wearing this watch makes your outfit really fun. When you have them, you feel confident wherever you are, you feel just right. How can you be insecure? When you open your eyes, you don’t know if your lover will be here with you next week, but you know this watch is!”
“Pick up your watch to get ready for the week. Everyone is different and these watches come in a variety of styles and sizes, so chances are there is one that will fit you perfectly. They are designed to be sexy and fashionable as well as very comfortable. All the watches are made from high quality fabric and use the best clocks, even after a year it still looks good. The watches are available in basic designs as well fashionable designs. So think about this one before you buy your next watch. With this watch, you’re truly ready to go anywhere you want”.
The following is the complete questionnaire used in the online experiment.
Introduction for the online experiment Welcome!
Thank you for taking part in this survey. This survey is conducted on behalf of my master program Persuasive Communication on the University of Amsterdam, supervised by Dr. S.F. Bernritter. By participating in this survey you're helping Wendy and me getting more insight in the effectiveness of her blog. On top of that, your answers are also valuable for scientific research.
This study is about the buying behavior of customers like you. In this survey you will be asked to evaluate blog posts and to answer questions about your behaviour on the Internet. The goal of this research is to research how blog posts can be effective.
Taking part in this study is voluntary. You can stop at any time. The survey should take approximately 15 minutes to complete. However, there is no time limit. If you feel like you need more than 15 minutes, you can take as much time as you need. Your responses are strictly anonymous. Data will only be used for the purpose of my master thesis and will not be given to third parties.
The survey can be completed either on the computer or on your mobile phone. However, we advice to complete the survey on your computer because of the size of the screen.
If you have any questions at any time about the survey or the procedures, you may contact the coordinator of the data collection process: heleen.lalisang@student.uva.nl or the supervisor.
Supervisor: Dr. S.F. Bernritter Email: S.F.Bernritter@uva.nl
Informed consent
Please read the following instructions. If you agree with the following, please accept the agreements below and the experiment will start.
- I hereby declare that I have been informed in a clear manner about the nature and method of the research.
- I agree, fully and voluntarily, to participate in this research study. With this, I retain the right to withdraw my consent (within 24 hours after participation), 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 Heleen Lalisang (heleen.lalisang@student.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. Confidentiality of my complaint is hereby guaranteed.
Click on the >> button to agree to these conditions and to start the survey.
1. Purchase intention
How much do you agree with the statements below? None at
all A little A moderate amount A lot A great deal I would consider to
buy this watch of this brand (Daniel Wellington)
It is possible that I will buy this watch of this brand If I were going to buy a watch, I will consider buying it from this brand The possibility I would consider buying this product…
My willingness to buy this product is…
The likelihood of me purchasing this product is…
2. Electronic word-of-mouth
How much do you agree with the statements below? Very strongly disagree Strongly disagree Disa gree
Neutral Agree Stron gly agree Very strongly agree I am willing to
let other use know that I am customer of this product I am willing to provide more positive online information about this product to other Instagram users. I am willing to share positive information about this
product with others on Instagram. I would like this brand on
Instagram I would like this post on
Instagram I would like to share this brand on Instagram I would appreciate it, if content from Daniel Wellington would appear on my timeline on Instagram 3. Source credibility
Circle how strong you agree or disagree with the statements below about the fashion blogger Wendy van Soest. I think Wendy is…
Very strongly disagree
Strongly disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Very strongly agree Dependable Honest Reliable Sincere Trustworthy An expert Experienced Knowledgeable Qualified Skilled
Please circle how much you agree with the following statements. The statements contain questions about the brand Daniel Wellington.
Very strongly disagree
Strongly disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Very strongly agree I would be interested in reading how this product is made I have compared product characteristics among brand of this product I think there are a great deal of differences among brands of this products I have a most preferred brand of this product 5. Persuasion knowledge
Conceptual persuasion knowledge
How much do you agree with the statements below? Very
strongly disagree
Strongly disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Very strongly agree The blog post contained advertising The blogger is paid to write the post The blog post is sponsored
Attitudinal persuasion knowledge
How much do agree with the statements below? Very
strongly disagree
Strongly disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Very strongly agree I think the post is
