comparison between attractiveness by an ...lib-sca.hkbu.edu.hk/trsimage/hp/04008936.pdfbar-chart...
TRANSCRIPT
COMPARISON BETWEEN ATTRACTIVENESS
AND EXPERTISE OF ATHLETE ENDORSERS
ON CONSUMERS’ PURCHASE INTENTION
BY
NG TSZ SHUN
04008936
AN HONOURS PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
BACHELOR OF ARTS
IN
PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND RECREATION MANAGEMENT (HONOURS)
HONG KONG BAPTIST UNIVERSITY
APRIL 2007
HONG KONG BAPTIST UNIVERSITY
13th APRIL, 2007
We hereby recommend that the Honours Project by Mr. Ng Tsz
Shun entitled “Comparison between attractiveness and
expertise of athlete endorsers on consumers’ purchase
intention” be accepted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the Bachelor of Arts Honours Degree in
Physical Education And Recreation Managenment.
Dr. Patrick Lau Dr. Eva Tsai
Chief Advisor Second Reader
Process Grade:
Product Grade:
Overall Grade:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my gratefulness to my chief advisor,
Dr. Patrick Lau, for his generous and professional guidance
throughout the whole project period. I would also like to show
my special thanks to DR. Eva Tsai for being my second reader.
Lastly, I would like to thank all the participants for their
sincere participation.
Ng Tsz Shun
Department of Physical Education
Hong Kong Baptist University
Date:
Abstract
For years, companies have spent huge sum of money to have
famous athletes as their product endorsers. The present study
attempted to investigate how the two characteristics of an
athlete endorser, attractiveness and expertise, would
influence the intention to purchase the endorsed product of
different groups of consumers. A total of 208 university
students participated in this study, with 104 male and 104
female. Subjects answered questions on their purchase
intention after viewing advertisements of a sports drink
featuring different types of endorsers. Results revealed that
although expertise and attractiveness were both positively
related to purchase intention, expertise was a more
significant factor than attractivenes. Other findings of
varied responses from different types of consumers were also
discussed. It is hoped that information provided from this
study could suggest considerations for sports marketers to
develop a more systematic approach to endorser selection.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER Page
1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Statement of Problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Delimitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Significance of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Introduction to the Use of Endorsers . . . . 14
Source Credibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Source Expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Source Attractiveness. . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Consumers’ Gender Differences. . . . . . . . 23
Consumers’ Involvement Level to Products . . 25
3. METHOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Sample of Selection. . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
CHAPTER Page
Development of the Questionnaire . . . . . . 27
Development of the Advertisements. . . . . . 30
Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Method of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4. ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35
Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Summary of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Recommendations for Further Study. . . . . . 69
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
APPENDIX
A. Questionnaire (English). . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
B. Stimulus Material (Advertisements)
i. Attractive x Skilled version. . . . . . . . . 80
ii. Attractive x Less Skilled version . . . . . . 81
CHAPTER Page
iii.Less Attractive x Skilled version . . . . . . 82
iv. Less Attractive x Less Skilled version. . . . 83
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE Page
1. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of
Gender of the Subjects(N=208). . . . . . . . . . 37
2a. Mean and Standard Deviation of Subjects’ Age . . 38
2b. Frequency and Percentage of Subjects’ Age. . . . 38
3a. Mean, Median and Standard Deviation of Subjects’
Sports Involvement Level Scores. . . . . . . . . 40
3b. Frequency and Percentage of Subjects’ Sports
Involvement Level Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4. Pearson’s Correlation Test between Endorser
Characteristics and Subjects’ Purchase Intention
(N=208). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5. Independent Samples t-test on Purchase Intention
between High and Low Involvement Subjects. . . . 44
6. Pearson’s Correlation Test between Endorser
Characteristics and Purchase Intention of
Subjects of High Sports Involvement Level(N=104)
TABLE Page
6. and Low Sports Involvement Level(N=104). . . . . 46
7. Independent Samples t-test on Purchase Intention
between Male and Female Subjects . . . . . . . . 48
8. Pearson’s Correlation Test between Endorser
Characteristics and Purchase Intention of Male
Subjects (N=104) and Female Subjects (N=104) . . 50
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE Page
1. Bar-chart showing the number of subjects
at different ages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2 Bar-chart showing the number of subjects at
different sports involvement level scores . . . 41
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Athlete and celebrity endorsers have been used as
promotional tools to promote a wide variety of products and
services for years. Companies were spending huge amount of
money to have athletes such as Tiger Woods ($70 million/year)
or Michael Jordan ($30 million/year) as their product
endorsers (Isidore, 2003). The reason behind this popularity
of celebrity advertising was that marketers and advertisers
believe messages delivered by these famous people would gain
a higher level of attention and recall for the consumers. And
these athletes in particular can command huge sums to endorsed
products because of their universal popularity and clean
images. Researches have shown that customers would have a more
positive brand attitude towards products that were endorsed
by celebrities (Petty, Cacioppo & Schumann, 1983) and were
more likely to choose those products (Agrawal & Kamakura,
1995). Furthermore, Atkin and Block (1983) found out that
celebrities would gain and hold consumers’ attention towards
a product and can provide expert testimonials for products
that helped contribute to their success.
As the use of athlete endorsers has grown over the years,
there have been a number of studies that have examined under
what conditions endorsers were more appropriate for products
and to explain the effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) of the
endorsers, and the circumstances under which effectiveness
was increased. In determining the major characteristics of
an effective endorser, researchers have focused mainly on
three dimensions of the endorser: attractiveness, expertise
and trustworthiness. All the three characteristics are
related to “source credibility”, a term commonly used to imply
a communicator’s positive characteristics that affect the
receiver’s acceptance of a message (Ohanian, 1991). Many
different theories have also been used to evaluate the
successful use of celebrity endorsers, the “match-up
hypothesis” ( e.g., Kamins 1990) suggested that endorsers were
more effective when there was a “fit” between the endorser
and the endorsed product.
In addition to the “fit” between endorsers and products,
there were obviously other consumer characteristics that
would affect the effectiveness of an athlete endorser. The
gender of consumers is undoubtedly one of these
characteristics. In the study of Boyd and Shank in 2004, sports
involvement of the consumers was also determined as a
significant factor that would affect endorsers’ effectiveness.
People that with a higher sport involvement, that is people
who spent more time on watching sports-related TV programs
and readings, or attending sports events, showed varied
responses in perceiving different types of endorsers and
products than consumers of low sports involvement. This
implied that the effectiveness of the same endorser may alter
when targeted on different types of consumers.
Actually, the most commonly used method for selecting
endorsers by marketers now is the fare quotient ratings, which
measures only the celebrity’s marketable popularity and
recognizability. But in order to avoid the risk of spending
a large sum of money with the selection of an inappropriate
endorser, it is important for marketers and advertisers to
develop a systematic approach to product endorser selection.
In the current study, we examine how the characteristics of
the endorser influence consumers’ intention to purchase a
sports-related product. Furthermore, to understand the
effectiveness of using the same type of endorser on different
target audience, this research also attempted to examine the
role of consumers’ gender and their sports involvement level
in making such purchasing decision.
Statement of the Problem
The purpose of this study was to investigate how the
physical appearance (i.e., attractiveness) and the skill and
knowledge of the endorser (i.e., expertise) would influence
consumers’ intention to purchase a sports-related product.
Besides, with different types of consumers, effectiveness
varied even with the same endorser. So in the current study,
we also attempted to examine how subjects’ of different gender
and different level of sports involvement would response to
the same endorser and as a result influence the intention to
purchase the sports-related product.
Definition of Terms
The following terms were operationally defined
specifically for this study:
Athlete Endorsers
Athlete endorsers will be defined as the athletes featured
in printed advertisements, radio, or television commercials,
saying that they use or prefer a particular product and praise
the good qualities of the product.
Expertise
Expertise will be defined as the extent to which the
endorsers possess knowledge to support the claims made in the
advertisements (Hovland, Janis, and Kelley, 1953). An expert
athlete would be a skilled one with significant achievements
in his/her own profession, and is recognized by the public.
Sports Involvement
Sports involvement will be defined as the perceived
interest in sports of an individual, or how personally
important sports are to an individual. It is in terms of
cognitive and affective dimension, rather than actual sports
participation. It is the subjects’ self-reported involvement
with sport and is measured by involvement scale developed by
Shank and Beasley (1998).
Delimitations
The delimitations of the present study were listed as
followings:
(1) The selected samples were delimited to the students of
the Hong Kong Baptist University.
(2) All data were distributed and collected by the
researcher in the duration between 5th March 2007 and 16th March
2007.
(3) The questionnaire was mainly designed to determine the
sports involvement level, attitude towards the endorser, and
intention to purchase the product of the subjects.
(4) Convenience sampling was used in this research.
Limitations
There were several limitations that should be considered
when interpreting the results of this research:
(1) It was assumed that all subjects would answer the
questionnaire honestly.
(2) It was assumed that attractiveness and expertise were
the only factors affecting the purchase intention of the
subjects.
(3) The degree of subjects’ understanding of the
questionnaire was uncontrollable.
(4) Generalizability of this research was limited as
fictitious athlete and an unpopular product are used to
control internal validity.
Hypotheses
The hypotheses of this study were as follow:
(1) There would be no significant relationship between
athlete attractiveness and intention to purchasing a
sports-related product.
(2) There would be no significant relationship between
athlete expertise and intention to purchasing a sports-
related product.
(3) There would be no significant difference between the
attractiveness-purchase relationship and the expertise-
purchase relationship.
(4) There would be no significant mean difference in
intention to purchase a sports-related product between
subjects of high sports involvement level and low sports
involvement level.
(5) There would be no significant difference between
attractiveness- purchase relationship and expertise-purchase
relationship among subjects of high sports involvement.
(6) There would be no significant difference between
attractiveness- purchase relationship and expertise-purchase
relationship among subjects of low sports involvement.
(7) There would be no significant mean difference in
intention to purchase a sports-related product between male
and female subjects.
(8) There would be no significant difference between
attractiveness- purchase relationship and expertise-purchase
relationship among male subjects.
(9) There would be no significant difference between
attractiveness- purchase relationship and expertise-purchase
relationship among female subjects.
Significant of the Study
As celebrity endorsement was becoming a more popular
business in the past years, consumers were constantly
overwhelmed by the persuasion of these endorsements before
making their purchase decisions. Since then, whether the
endorsement was making a positive impact on the product or
not was already out of the question. Companies spent billions
of money in celebrity endorsement for their products just as
to compete with their competitors and increase exposure of
their products. And the rational for product endorsement and
the criteria for selecting an appropriate and effective
endorser for different products had became a blur. The
situation also existed in the sport industry as athlete
endorsement could also be applied to sport-related products.
And it would be beneficial for sports marketers to understand
that among so many athletes, which type of them or what
characteristics they possessed would be most effective when
endorsing different products. In the current study, the two
major dimensions of evaluating the effectiveness of an athlete
endorser, attractiveness and expertise, were compared to
reveal the more significant characteristic of an athlete
endorser when endorsing a sports-related product.
It could not be denied that differences existed between
the two genders. One aspect that sports marketers concerned
the most was how the two genders differently processed
promotional messages, so that different gender-specific
marketing strategies could be applied to achieve maximum
promotional effects. In the current study, it also compared
the effect of the two endorser characteristics between male
and female to discover whether the determining factor would
change when perceived by male and female consumers, so that
implications could be provided to sports marketers when they
were to consider an appropriate and more effective endorser
to sell products targeting male or female consumers.
Furthermore, the study also provided sports marketers with
information on picking a suitable athlete endorser when
targeting markets of two different natures, which were whether
the market was a group of sport enthusiasts who were highly
involved with the product, or sports fans whose involvement
level with the product was low. This was to investigate whether
the two groups would perceive information differently and
whether different approaches should be use when approaching
these consumers.
Implications of this study aimed to provide a clearer
picture on athlete endorsement and to provide clear directions
for marketers when considering the most suitable product
endorser for different consumers. Among the numerous use of
endorsement today, it was hoped that findings of this study
could provide information to develop a more systematic
approach to athlete endorser selection, so that products could
be endorsed by the suitable endorser. And for sports marketers,
a minimum investment of money and resources on advertising
their products could have the maximum return and to achieve
their final goal, to maximize product sales.
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Consumers are exposed to millions of advertisements
throughout their lives. Among these overabundant and clutter
sea of advertisements, some were easily being ignored or
forgotten by the viewers. But some of the “better”
advertisements do stand out above the others and the meaning
of it is successfully transferred to the consumers, or even
to entertain them and persuaded them. Existing research has
shown that there are benefits to use spokespersons or
endorsers in advertising. The sex, credibility, and physical
attractiveness of the endorsers will all influence the
persuasiveness of the advertisement when targeting different
markets. Furthermore, consumers’ gender and involvement level
to the product was also determined as a significant factor
that affects the effectiveness of certain advertisement. In
this review of literature, it gives a clearer picture of the
relationship of the four main factors being investigated in
the study: expertise, attractiveness, consumers’ gender and
involvement level with consumers’ purchase intention of the
product. There are six sections in this chapter. The first
section introduces the use of celebrities as product endorsers
and its advantages and disadvantages. The following five
sections summarize the findings of previous researches on the
following categories: (a) source credibility; (b) source
expertise; (c) source attractiveness; (d) gender differences
and (e) consumers’ involvement level to the product.
Celebrity Endorsement
By definition, celebrity refers to individuals who are well
known to the public (Speck, Schumann & Thompson, 1988). One
of the examples was sports figures. These famous athletes with
celebrity status possessed high profile, distinctive
qualities and popular image in the eyes of the public. Some
young consumers were often captivated by these athletes and
imitate their styles and behaviors. In 1989, McCraken defined
celebrity endorsers in advertising as “any individual who
enjoys public recognition and who uses this recognition on
behalf of a consumer good by appearing with it in an
advertisement” (p. 310). This advertising strategy has been
found to induce positive consumer responses. A survey by
O’Mahony and Meenaghan in 1997 revealed that consumers
regarded advertisements featuring celebrity endorsers as
“attention-gaining, entertaining, likeable and impactful.”
The use of celebrity endorsement was relatively more
influential than other types of endorsements in several ways.
The study of Sternthal, Philips and Dholakia in 1978 indicated
that advertisements that featuring celebrities, or brands
that aligned with celebrities, drew more attention from the
public than those advertisements that did not take advantage
of an individual’s celebrity status. Moreover, athletes with
worldwide popularity and recognition could help products or
brands to overcome cultural barriers in global marketing
communications. Additionally, when choosing celebrities with
distinctive images as a brand endorser, it helps to create,
enhance and change the images of a brand (Erdogan, 1999).
Despite all the advantages, celebrity endorsement also
involved some risks. The large sum of money spent in the
endorsement would become unrewarding when the selected
endorser was involved in illegal or unethical behaviors. Till
and Shimp (1998) found out that negative information about
an athlete endorser, like engagement in steroid use of an
athlete in the study, would influence consumers’ perceptions
of both the athlete and the endorsed product. Another concern
was that when some celebrity became associated with multiple
products, the over exposure would reduces the positive effect
of the endorsements and causes the message delivered to be
less effective (Tripp, Jensen & Carlson, 1994). Consumers
might become skeptical about the message carried by the
endorser and think the endorser appeared in the advertisement
for the compensation he or she receives, rather than sincerely
believed in the merit of the products.
Source Credibility
In response to the increasing concern about selection of
endorser, researchers have attempted to theorize the
effectiveness of celebrity endorsement in advertising. This
had been studied by mostly applying the Source Credibility
Model (Hovland et al., 1953). The model identified expertise
and trustworthiness as the two dimensions of source
credibility, as a result influencing the effectiveness of a
message the source delivers. Expertise of an endorser means
that the ability of an endorser to provide accurate
information comes from knowledge, experience, training or
skills the endorser possesses (Erdogan, Baker & Tagg, 2001).
Trustworthiness referred to the consumers’ confidence in the
endorser for carrying messages in an honest manner (Ohanian,
1991). Research on source credibility has shown that in most
situations, a source of higher credibility was more effective
than a less credible source (Sternthal et al., 1978). Ohanian
(1990) also found that a highly credible source could generate
more positive attitudes towards the situation advocated by
the source and encourage more behavioral changes than less
credible sources. Some researchers (e.g., Atkin & Block, 1983)
have found that celebrities in general were viewed as more
credible and as a result they had a greater influence on
attitudes and purchasing intention than non-celebrities. In
1999, Tse revealed that consumers perceive products endorsed
by a highly credible endorser as “more safe” that products
endorsed by a less credible endorser. And both the perceived
expertise and credibility of an endorser would influence
consumers’ product purchase intentions (O’Mahony & Meenaghan
1998). Additionally, Gotleib (1987) found out that source
credibility influenced perceptions of both consumers with
high and low involvement with the products or services. While
many researches have proven the importance and impact of
source credibility in advertising, Ohanian (1991)
specifically partitioned source credibility into three
dimensions: expertise, trustworthiness and physical
attractiveness.
Source Expertise
From the literature, source expertise has been defined as
“the extent to which a communicator is perceived to be a source
of valid assertions” (Hovland et al., 1953). Research by
O’Mahony and Meenaghan (1998) found that source expertise
could significantly affect a consumer purchase intention,
that is the more expert the consumers believed the endorser
to be, the more likely the consumers would purchase the product.
Source expertise could also act as the central processing cue
in printed advertisements and possibly other advertising
conditions (Homer & Kahle, 1990). Similar results are also
concluded in the research of Woodside and Davenport (1974)
and Busch and Wilson (1976), that customers’ purchasing
behaviors were positively swayed by the perceived expertise
of the salesperson. Compared with source attractiveness, Till
and Busler (2000) revealed that although physical
attractiveness had an effect on purchase intentions, the
expertise of the source was more important for matching a brand
with the appropriate endorser. This finding is further
supported by the research of Maddux and Rogers (1980) who found
that attractiveness had no main effects on persuasion,
suggesting that under certain condition, the source must also
be perceived as having expertise in order to persuade. From
the definition of celebrities, celebrities were not
considered to possess expertise. But in reality, celebrities
often endorse products that were related to their professional
areas. For example Ronaldinho for Nike soccer boots and Roger
Federer for Wilson Tennis Racquets. These were regarded as
the most persuasive endorsements since these well-known
athletes brought instant credibility to the brands through
the close association between their career in the sport and
the products. Expertise had also been identified as a strong
factor that influences source credibility and purchase
intention (Ohanian, 1991). In the study of Till and Busler
(2000), a fictitious endorser Ted Franklin was created and
described as either a “US Olympic Track and Field athlete”
or a “stage and screen actor”. And he was paired with either
energy bars, considered an expertise-related product, or
expertise-unrelated candy bars. Results showed that the
athlete induced significantly higher brand attitudes than the
actor when endorsing energy bars, but not in endorsing candy
bars.
Source Attractiveness
Celebrities are often chosen as endorsers because of their
attractiveness coming from both their celebrity status and
physical attractiveness (Erdogan 1999). Baker and Churchill
(1977) have revealed that attractive communicators in general
can generate more positive stereotypes and greater purchase
intention in their study using attractiveness or
unattractiveness models paired with coffee or cologne. In the
study of Kamins (1990), it indicated that attractive person
provides a particularly good fit when endorsing a product that
is supposed to enhance attractiveness of the consumers, such
as skin-care lotions. Similar results were also showed in the
study of Till and Busler (1998), which found that the use of
an attractive endorser paired with a product that was
perceived to enhance a use’s attractiveness (e.g., cologne)
was more effective than the use of an attractive endorser
paired with a product that was not perceived as enhancing the
user’s attractiveness (e.g., a ball pen). In fact, research
has also indicated that brand attitude is more positive when
the product is endorsed by an attractive person even if the
product is not related to physical appearance (Till et al.,
2000). However, some other studies demonstrated that
attractiveness did not have a significant effect on perceived
credibility of the source nor persuasion. Caballero, Lumpkin
and Madden (1989) showed grocery shoppers videotapes of a less
or highly attractive model in advertisements of a soft drink
and cheese, but did not find that the attractiveness of the
model affected purchase intention. Similar to the study of
Cabellero and Soloman in 1984, which used a less or highly
attractive model for in-store displays for beer and facial
tissues, no effect of attractiveness on beer sales was found.
But strangely found that the less attractive model actually
increased the sales of facial tissue.
Gender Differences
Studies in consumer behavior have consistently reported
differences between males and females. For marketers and
advertisers, the most important aspect of gender may be
difference in how males and females process promotional
information. Holbrook (1986) found out that when compared to
males, females were more visually oriented and more
intrinsically motivated. From the study of Preetz, Parks and
Spencer (2004), it reported that the odds that male subjects
would be influenced by male endorsers were 2.51 times the odds
they would be influenced by a female endorser. This finding
were supported by Rubel’s (1995) and Veltri and Long’s(1998)
suggestion that male consumers would respond more positively
to male endorsers than to female endorsers. Although they also
reported that female endorsers had more appeal for women than
male endorsers, Preetz et al. (2004) found out that female
subjects did not demonstrate a preference for female endorsers.
Gender preferences were also found in the study of Boyd and
Shank in 2004. Their findings showed that regardless of
product type, subjects rated endorsers of the same gender as
more trustworthy. When the same athlete was used as endorser,
independent of the endorser’s gender, male consumers rated
the athlete as more attractiveness, while female consumers
rated the athlete as more expertise and trustworthy. They also
revealed that female subjects rated endorsers as more expert
when there was a congruence between the endorser and the
products, or when endorser uses the product in their sports.
On the contrary, male subjects rated endorsers as more expert
when there is not an endorser-product match. Despite several
studies have shown effects of gender difference, Ohanian (1991)
stated that gender and age of the subjects had no significant
effect on their purchase intention and also on how they
evaluated the attractiveness, trustworthiness, and expertise
of the endorsers.
Level of Involvement
Many studies have used the construct of involvement as a
mediator of advertising effectiveness. Mazursky and Schul
(1992) found that the consumers’ level of involvement to the
product moderated the joint effectiveness between the source
credibility and the message quality of the advertisement.
Under a low involvement condition, the source is considered
to be independent to the message, while under high involvement
condition the source was perceived as part of the message.
In other words, the source credibility acted as a peripheral
cue under low involvement while under high involvement, it
was a central cue of the advertisement. It concluded that a
consumer possessed a high level of involvement of a certain
product would process the endorser of the product differently
to a consumer that possessed a low involvement of the product.
Boyd and Shank (2004) found that the effects of endorser gender
and product matching were only significant for low involvement
consumers. It indicated that it might be futile to attempt
to predict the effects of gender or product matching to highly
involved consumers, but it would be beneficial when the target
market had a low involvement to the product.
Chapter 3
METHOD
The method of this study was divided into the following
sections:
(a) Sample of Selection,
(b) Development of the Questionnaire,
(c) Development of the Advertisements,
(d) Procedures, and
(e) Method of Analysis.
Sample of Selection
Subjects in this study were undergraduate students of the
Hong Kong Baptist University. The subjects were all aged above
eighteen. The total sample size was 208, with 104 male and
104 female.
Development of the questionnaire
The questionnaire used in this survey was divided into
three parts. In the first part, the endorser’s expertise and
attractiveness were investigated. In the second part, the
subjects’ intention to purchase the product was asked. In the
third part, the subjects’ sport involvement was studied.
In the first part of the questionnaire, expertise and
attractiveness of the endorser in the advertisement perceived
by the subjects were each measured with the expertise scale
and attractiveness scale developed by Ohanian (1990). The
reliability coefficients for the expertise measure (α=.97)
and the attractiveness measures (α=.96) were both high. Items
from both scales were preceded by the phase “The athlete in
the advertisement is...” and anchored by seven-point
semantic-differential scales. For the expertise scale, the
endpoints of the five items were “Not an expert – an expert,
inexperienced – experienced, unknowledgeable – knowledgeable,
unqualified – qualified, and unskilled – skilled”. For the
attractiveness scale, the endpoints of the five items were
“unattractive – attractive, not classy – classy, ugly –
beautiful, plain – elegant, and not sexy – sexy”.
In the second part, three items from Till and Busler (2000)
were used to measure the intention to purchase the product.
Subjects were being asked the question “How likely is it that
you would consider purchasing the product in this
advertisement?” The items was anchored by seven-point
semantic-differential scales with endpoints “unlikely –
likely, definitely would not – definitely would, and
improbable – probable”. The reliability estimate for the
measure was high (α=.93).
In the third part, the subjects’ self-reported involvement
with sports was studied using an eight-item involvement scale
developed by Shank and Beasley (1998) with the coefficient
alpha α=.93. The involvement scale was preceded by the phase
“To me, sports are...”, and the items were anchored by
seven-point semantic-differential scales. The endpoints of
the eight items were “Boring – exciting, uninteresting -
interesting, worthless - valuable, unappealing - appealing,
useless – useful, not needed – needed, irrelevant – relevant,
and unimportant - important”.
Development of the Advertisements
In previous research (Ohanian, 1991), it is described that
a celebrity endorser with expertise specifically to a product
was significantly more effective than a non-celebrity
endorser. In order to limit this factor, a non-sport specific
product, a sport drink, was chosen as the endorsed product
in the current study. It was believed that a sport drink could
be used by any athlete in any sport, so that there would be
no internal bias or undesired matching effect of the endorser
and the product. The product chosen in this study was an actual
sport drink, called Isostar, but it was not one that is
currently popular or visible on the market today, such as
Gatorade or Pocari.
For the endorser, we created a fictitious female tennis
player, Nicole Diaz. The use of a fictitious endorser is
consistent with the study of Till and Busler in 2000. If a
familiar endorser is used, there will be significant
variations in the subjects’ knowledge and attitude toward that
familiar athlete, and the high with-in group variation will
reduce the power of the study. Furthermore, the use of a
fictitious endorser minimizes the opportunity for unintended
deceptive confusions.
In this study, there are four versions of advertisements,
which featured four different types of endorsers. All
advertisements featured either an attractive and skilled
Nicole Diaz, an attractive and less skilled Nicole Diaz, a
less attractive and skilled Nicole Diaz, or a less attractive
and less skilled Nicole Diaz, were paired with a picture of
the sport drink, Isostar. Consistent with the study of Fink,
Cunningham, and Kensicki (2004), the attractive endorser had
a long blonde hair, a slender face, and light makeup, whereas
for the less attractive endorser, she had a shorter brown hair,
a slightly heavier face, and no makeup. In the skilled
condition, the caption “Nicole Diaz – Champion of the US Open
and Wimbledon Women’s Single in 2004, 2005 and 2006.” was added
below the endorser’s face, while in the less skilled condition,
the above praise was not included in the advertisement. All
versions of the advertisement had a headline and brief line
of copy to visually pair the endorser with the product.
Procedures
Subjects in this study were selected by convenience
sampling inside the university campus and participation was
voluntary. We incorporated a two (attractive vs. less
attractive) times two (skilled vs. less skilled) design to
test the hypotheses. The subjects were given a brief
introduction of the study before one of the four different
versions of the advertisement was randomly distributed to them,
together with a questionnaire. The subjects then have 20
seconds to view the advertisement and completed the
questionnaire at their own rate. The materials were collected
by the experimenter once the questionnaire was completed.
Method of Analysis
All the responses in the questionnaire were coded for further
analysis and were inputted into the Statistical Package for
the Social Science (SPSS program). Pearson Product Moment
Coefficient of Correlation (r) was used to determine the
correlation between attractiveness of the endorser and the
intention to purchase, and also between expertise of the
endorser and the intention to purchase. To define
relatively low and high levels of self perceived sports
involvement, subjects were divided into two equal split halves.
Subjects having sports involvement level scored below the
median score were treated as having a low sports involvement
level and subjects scored above the median score were treated
as having a high level of involvement with sports. Independent
samples t-test was used to compare the mean difference of
intention to purchase between subjects of high level and low
level sports involvement, and between male and female subjects.
To test for significant difference between two dependent
correlations, a t score is calculated to determine if there
is a significant difference between the attractiveness-
purchase correlation and the expertise-purchase correlation
Chapter 4
Analysis of Data
The purpose of this study was to investigate how the
attractiveness and expertise of an endorser would influence
different types of consumers’ purchase intention for a sports
drink. A total number of 208 questionnaires were received.
When analyzing the data collected, independent samples t-test
was used in comparing the mean difference between purchase
intentions of different types of subjects. Pearson’s
correlation test was used in correlating subjects’ perceived
attractiveness and expertise of the endorser with purchase
intention of subjects. The level of significant was set at .05
level. And the above analyses were computed with the aid of
the Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS). To
determine a significant difference between attractiveness-
purchase correlation and expertise-purchase correlation of
different groups of subjects, a t score was also calculated.
In this chapter, the data analyzed were presented as the
following:
1.) Description of personal data of the subjects, including
age, gender, and the subjects’ self perceived sports
involvement level.
2.) Presentation of results from Pearson’s correlation test
between attractiveness of the endorser and subjects’
purchase intention, and between expertise of the
endorser and subjects’ purchase intention.
3.) Presentation of result from Independent Samples t-test
on purchase intention between subjects of different
sports involvement levels.
4.) Presentation of results from Pearson’s correlation test
of subjects with different sports involvement level
between attractiveness of the endorser and subjects’
purchase intention, and between expertise of the
endorser and subjects’ purchase intention.
5.) Presentation of result from Independent Samples t-test
on purchase intention between male subjects and female
subjects.
6.) Presentation of results from Pearson’s correlation test
of male and female subjects between attractiveness of
the endorser and subjects’ purchase intention, and
between expertise of the endorser and subjects’ purchase
intention.
Results
1.) Descriptive Statistics of Subjects
In this study, 208 questionnaires were collected. Among
all the subjects, 50%(N=104) were male and 50%(N=104) were
female. (see Table 1)
Table 1
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Gender of the
Subjects (N=208)
Subjects’ gender Frequency Percentage(%)
Male 104 50.0
Female 104 50.0
Total 208 100.0
All the subjects were aged between 17 to 27 years old. The
mean age of the subjects was 21.45 and the standard deviation
was 1.4802 (see Table 2a). Also, the frequency and percentage
distribution of the subjects’ age were presented in Table 2b.
Table 2a
Mean and Standard Deviation of Subjects’ Age (N=208)
Min. Max. Mean SD
Subjects’ Age 17 27 21.45 1.48
Table 2b
Frequency and Percentage of Subjects’ Age
Subjects’ Age Frequency Percentage(%)
17 1 0.5
18 3 1.4
19 12 5.8
20 29 13.9
21 71 34.1
22 50 24.0
23 26 12.5
24 9 4.3
25 5 2.4
26 1 0.5
27 1 0.5
Total 208 100.0
Figure 1. Number of subjects of different ages.
For subjects’ self perceived sports involvement level, the
lowest possible score was 8 and the highest possible score
was 56. The subjects’ mean score was 47.66, with a median of
48.50 and standard deviation of 5.96 (see Table 3a). The
frequency and percentage of the scores were also presented
in Table 3b. Subjects were then divided into two equal split
halves by the median in order to define relatively low and
high levels of self perceived sports involvement level.
Table 3a
Mean, Median and Standard Deviation of Subjects’ Sports
Involvement Level Scores (N=208)
Min. Max. Mean Median SD
Sports Involvement 31 56 47.66 48.50 5.96
Level Scores*
* 8=lowest involvement level to 56=highest involvement level
Table 3b
Frequency and Percentage of Subjects’ Sports Involvement
Level Scores
Sports Involvement Frequency Percentage
Level Scores (%)
31 1 0.5
32 1 0.5
35 1 0.5
36 5 2.4
37 6 2.9
38 6 2.9
39 5 2.4
40 7 3.4
41 7 3.4
42 6 2.9
43 5 2.4
44 11 5.3
45 10 4.8
46 9 4.3
47 10 4.8
48 14 6.7
49 14 6.7
50 13 6.3
51 13 6.3
52 13 6.3
53 14 6.7
54 7 3.4
55 9 4.3
56 21 10.1
Total 208 100
Figure 2. Number of subjects of different sports involvement
level scores.
2.) Correlations between Endorser’s Characteristics and
Purchase Intention
When analyzing correlations between characteristics of
endorser and purchase intention, results from Pearson’s
correlation test showed that attractiveness of the endorser
was positively correlated with the purchase intention of all
subjects (r=0.50, p=.00). Similar to the above result, a
positive correlation was also found between expertise of the
endorser and purchase intention of all subjects (r=.68,
p=0.00). From the results, it could be concluded that when
the endorser was perceived as more attractive or more expert,
subjects would have a higher purchase intention on the product
being endorsed(see Table 4). As reported above, expertise of
the endorser would have a stronger positive correlation than
attractiveness with purchase intention. And from the t score
of the two correlations, (t=3.31, p<0.05), it could be
concluded that the correlation between expertise and purchase
intention was significantly stronger than the correlation
between attractiveness and purchase intention.
Table 4
Pearson’s Correlation Test between Endorser Characteristics
and Subjects’ Purchase Intention (N=208)
Endorser
Characteristics
r p t score
Attractiveness 0.50 0.00* 3.31**
Expertise
0.68 0.00*
*=p<0.05, two tailed
**significant when t >1.96, df=205
3.) Independent Samples t-test on Purchase Intention
From the results of independent samples t-test on purchase
intention between high and low sports involvement level
subjects, there was a significant mean difference between high
involvement subjects’ purchase intention and low involvement
subjects’ purchase intention (t=-2.20, p=0.03). The mean for
high involvement level subjects (SD=4.87) and low involvement
subjects (SD=4.25) were 12.03 and 10.63 respectively.
Furthermore, the mean difference between high and low
involvement subjects was -1.39 (see Table 5). From the result,
it could be concluded that purchase intention of subjects with
a higher sports involvement level were significantly higher
than purchase intention of low sports involvement level
subjects.
Table 5
Independent Samples t-test on Purchase Intention between High
and Low Involvement Subjects
Involvement
Level
N
Mean
SD
Mean
Difference
t
p
High 104 12.03 4.87 -1.39 -2.20 0.03*
Low
104 10.63 4.25
*=p<0.05, two tailed
4.) Correlations between Endorser’s Characteristics and
Purchase Intention of Subjects with different Sports
Involvement Level
Results from Pearson’s correlation test showed that
purchase intention of high involvement subjects (N=104) was
positively correlated with attractiveness of the endorser
(r=0.44, p=0.00), and also with expertise of the endorser
(r=0.74, p=0.00). And with a t score of 4.21, the correlation
between expertise and purchase intention was significantly
stronger than the correlation between attractiveness and
purchase intention for subjects having a high level of sports
involvement (t=4.21, p<0.05). Positive correlations were also
found in purchase intention of low involvement subjects (N=104)
with both attractiveness of the endorser (r=0.60, p=0.00) and
expertise of the endorser (r=0.62, p=0.00). But contrary, with
a t score of 0.24, there was no significant difference between
attractiveness- purchase correlation and expertise-purchase
correlation (t=0.24, p>0.05) among subjects of low sports
involvement level (see Table 6). From the results, it could
be concluded that perceived expertise of the endorser was a
significantly stronger determining factor than endorser’s
attractiveness for purchase intention of high sports
involvement subjects.
Although expertise of the endorser was the stronger
determining factor of purchase intention than attractiveness
for both high and low sports involvement level subjects,
subjects with low sports involvement level would have a
stronger positive attractiveness-purchase relationship
(r=0.60, p=0.00) than high involvement subjects(r=0.44,
p=0.00). In contrast, high sports involvement level subjects
would have a stronger positive expertise-purchase
relationship(r=0.74, p=0.00) than low involvement
subjects(r=0.62, p=0.00).
Table 6
Pearson’s Correlation Test between Endorser Characteristics
and Purchase Intention of Subjects of High Sports Involvement
Level (N=104) and Low Sports Involvement Level (N=104)
Involvement
Level
Endorser
Characteristics
r
p
t score
High Attractiveness 0.44 0.00* 4.21**
Expertise 0.74 0.00*
Low
Attractiveness
0.60
0.00*
0.24**
Expertise 0.62 0.00*
*=p<0.05, two tailed
**significant when t >1.98, df=101
5.) Independent Samples t-test on Purchase Intention of male
and female subjects
From the results of independent samples t-test on purchase
intention between male and female subjects, there was no
significant mean difference between male subjects’ purchase
intention and female subjects’ purchase intention (t=0.56,
p=0.58). The mean for male subjects (SD=4.72) and female
subjects (SD=4.53) were 11.51 and 11.15 respectively.
Furthermore, the mean difference between male and female
subjects was 0.36 (see Table 7). From the result, it could
be concluded that although purchase intention of male subjects
was higher than purchase intention of female subjects, the
difference between the two was not significant.
Table 7
Independent Samples t-test on Purchase Intention between Male
and Female Subjects
Subject
Gender
N
Mean
SD
Mean
Difference
t
P
Male 104 11.51 4.72 0.36 0.56 0.58
Female 104 11.15 4.52
*=p<0.05, two tailed
6.) Correlations between Endorser’s Characteristics and
Purchase Intention of Subjects with different Gender
Results from Pearson’s correlation test showed that
purchase intention of male subjects (N=104) was positively
correlated with attractiveness of the endorser (r=0.48,
p=0.00), and also with expertise of the endorser (r=0.58,
p=0.00). And there was no significant difference between the
attractiveness-purchase correlation and expertise-purchase
correlation (t=1.21, p<0.05) among male subjects. Positive
correlations were also found in purchase intention of female
subjects (N=104) with both attractiveness of the endorser
(r=0.54, p=0.00) and expertise of the endorser (r=0.79,
p=0.00). But contrary to male subjects, with a t score of 4.14,
the correlation between expertise and purchase intention was
significantly stronger than the correlation between
attractiveness and purchase intention for female subjects
(t=4.14, p<0.05) (see table 8). From the results, it could
be concluded that perceived expertise of the endorser was a
significantly stronger determining factor than endorser’s
attractiveness for purchase intention of female subjects, but
the two were similar for male subjects. Furthermore,
expertise of the endorser was the stronger determining factor
for purchase intention than attractiveness of the endorser
for both male and female subjects. And both the
attractiveness-purchase relationship(r=0.54, p=0.00) and
expertise-purchase relationship(r=0.79, p=0.00) for female
subjects were stronger than those of male subjects. In other
words, female subjects’ purchase intention is more positively
correlated to both the endorser’s attractiveness and
expertise than male subjects.
Table 8
Pearson’s Correlation Test between Endorser Characteristics
and Purchase Intention of Male Subjects (N=104) and Female
Subjects (N=104)
Subjects
Gender
Endorser
Characteristics
r
p
t score
Male Attractiveness 0.48 0.00* 1.21**
Expertise 0.58 0.00*
Female
Attractiveness
0.54
0.00*
4.14**
Expertise 0.79 0.00*
*=p<0.05, two tailed
**significant when t >1.98, df=101
Discussion
From the present research, a clearer picture about the
effectiveness of different characteristics of an athlete
endorser on product purchase intention of different types of
consumers was given to provide information and implications
to sports marketers and advertisers when choosing the suitable
product endorser for Hong Kong consumers. This chapter was
divided into four sections so as to further elaborate the
results of the research. The first three sections are the
different degree of effectiveness of the characteristics of
the endorser for a.) general consumers; b.) consumers of
different sports involvement level; and c.) male and female
consumers. The last section is the implications of the present
research.
General Consumers
For all the subjects, results from the present research
showed that when the perceived attractiveness of the athlete
endorser increased, the purchase intention for the product
would also increase. It indicated that there was a positive
correlation between endorser’s attractiveness and product
purchase intention. This result was consistent with the
findings of Petroshius and Crocker (1989) and Till and Busler
(2000), which they all reported that attractive communicators
in general could generate more positive stereotypes and
greater purchase intention in their studies. According to
Kahle and Homer (1985), they suggested the reason behind might
be that attractive endorsers would result in an increase in
the likeability of the product, and also increase the arousal
of consumers, as a result induced a catalytic effect on
information processing of consumers and a more favorable
attitude towards the product. In other words, the more
attractive the endorser was, the higher the purchase intention.
The results of the present research also revealed that,
similar to attractiveness of the endorser, when the perceived
expertise of the endorser was high, subjects purchase
intention for the product would also be high. It indicated
that there was also a positive correlation between expertise
of the endorser and product purchase intention. Similar
findings were also presented in the studies of O’Mahony and
Meenaghan (1997), Woodside and Davenport (1974) and Busch and
Wilson (1976), in which they all concluded that the more expert
the consumers believed the endorser to be, the more likely
the consumers would purchase the product. It might be due to
the reason suggested by Boyd and Shank (2004) that when a
sport-related product was endorsed by an athlete, the
endorser’s credibility was enhanced by the perceived
expertise of the athlete, and consumers would be more
persuaded by a highly credible source than a source perceived
as less credible.
Furthermore, between expertise and attractiveness of the
endorser, results from present research reflected that
expertise of the endorser would be significantly more
important to consumers’ purchase intention of a sport drink
than attractiveness. The correlation between expertise and
purchase intention was significantly stronger than
correlation between attractiveness and purchase intention.
Ohanian (1991) explained this finding by the fact that
nowadays as most endorsers in advertisements were attractive,
consumers were getting used to attractive endorsers and as
a result they had a mind set in which attractiveness of the
endorser was not a determinant factor for making decisions
on product selection. Further, according to previous studies
(Till & Busler, 1998; Maddux & Rogers, 1980), this outcome
was logical. It might because sports drink was perceived by
consumers as a product that facilitates athletes to achieve
a better performance. According to Till and Busler (1998),
a “match-up” effect between the endorser and the endorsed
product was the main driving force to purchase intention.
Attractiveness has little to do with performance itself and
has little impact on improving performance. As a result in
this study, the “match-up” effect between an attractiveness
endorser and the sports drink was weak. On the other hand,
level of expertise has direct positive impact on an athlete’s
performance, which leads to an obvious “match-up” effect
between the expert endorser and the sports drink. To conclude
the above, it might suggest that expertise of the endorser
was more effective than attractiveness in matching the athlete
endorser with the sports drink. Thus, when a sports drink was
endorsed by an expert athlete, consumers’ purchase intention
would be significantly higher than when it was endorsed by
an attractiveness athlete.
Consumers of Different Sports Involvement Level
Consumers’ involvement level with a product was determined
by previous studies as a significant factor affecting
consumers’ purchase intention. In the present research, a
subjects’ sports involvement level was also determined as a
significant factor affecting the intention of a subject to
purchase a sports drink. Results showed that the intention
to purchase a sports drink for subjects with high sports
involvement level was significant higher than the purchase
intention of low sports involvement subjects. The reason might
be that subjects of high sports involvement level would have
a better knowledge or more familiar with various types of
sports drinks than low sports involvement level. As a result
they were more interested and more willing to try different
types of sports drinks, compared with low sports involvement
level subjects who did not even try any kinds of sports drinks
in their daily life.
The characteristics of the endorser also possessed
different degree of effectiveness for different subjects. For
subjects with high sports involvement level, the correlation
between expertise and purchase intention was significantly
stronger than correlation between attractiveness and purchase
intention. But for subjects with low sports involvement level,
there was no significant difference between the expertise-
purchase correlation and attractiveness-purchase correlation.
These findings were consistent with the findings of Mazursky
and Schul in 1992. Mazursky and Schul suggested the reason
behind this phenomenon might be that under a low involvement
condition, the source, or the endorser, was considered to be
independent or peripheral to the message of the advertisement
by low involvement consumers. They regarded expertise and
attractiveness of the endorser as independent to their
purchase intention. This explained why the endorser’s
expertise and attractiveness would have a similar effect on
purchase intention for low sports involvement subjects. But
the researchers also stated that while under high involvement
condition, the source was perceived as the central message
of the advertisement, and high involvement subjects might more
readily see the connection between “expert endorser” and
“sports drink to enhance one’s performance”, and they would
consider the expertise and attractiveness of the endorser
before making their purchase decision. As a result there was
a significant difference between the effects of endorser’s
expertise and the effect of endorser’s attractiveness on
purchase intention of high sports involvement subjects.
Additionally, it was interesting to found out that the
expertise-purchase correlation of high sports involvement
level subjects was stronger than that of low sports
involvement subjects. But on the other hand, the
attractiveness-purchase correlation of low sports
involvement level subjects was stronger than that of high
sports involvement subjects. It suggested that attractiveness
of the endorser would be a more important factor for low sports
involvement level subjects to purchase a product than high
sports involvement level subjects. Implications for this
finding would be discussed in the later chapters.
Male and Female Consumers
From the present research, there was no significant
difference on purchase intention between male and female
subjects. It was consistent with the research findings of
Ohanian in 1991, which revealed that gender of the subjects
had no significant effect on their purchase intention. Present
results also indicated that for male subjects, there was no
significant difference between their expertise-purchase
correlation and attractiveness-purchase correlation. On the
contrary, female subjects showed a significant difference
between the two correlations. Their expertise-purchase
correlation was significantly stronger than their
attractiveness-purchase correlation, which was quiet diverse
from the findings of Holbrook in 1986 concluding that female
subjects were more visually oriented. This phenomenon could
be explained by several previous research findings. Boyd and
Shank (2004) suggested that how consumers’ perceptions to
their own expertise regarding a product would influence their
reliance on an endorser. As male were suggested to be spending
more time in watching sports on television and possibly having
a greater knowledge of sports than female (Gantz & Wenner,
1991), they were possibly socialized to believe male should
know more about sports and therefore see the endorser’s
expertise as less relevant (Boyd & Shank, 2004). As a result
expertise of the endorser was not as significantly important
as it was to female consumers. Another possible reason for
why expertise-purchase correlation was significantly
stronger than the attractiveness-purchase correlation for
female, but not for male, was that female were more likely
than male to gather information about a product than to succumb
to hero-worship (Sutton & Watlingtion, 1994). Darley & Smith
(1993) also supported by suggesting female consumers were more
caution and more objective than male consumers when purchasing
a product, and they were more aware of the fit between the
product and its endorser and would selectively process
relevant information only.
Although the difference between expertise and
attractiveness of the endorser was not statistically
significant for male subjects, results from the present
research revealed that expertise of the endorser was the more
important characteristic than attractiveness to foster both
male and female consumers’ purchase intention. This could also
be explained by previous explanation stating that consumers
perceived expertise was more effective in matching the athlete
endorser with a sport-related product than attractiveness.
Furthermore, in the current study, the expertise-purchase
correlation and attractiveness-purchase intention for female
subjects were both stronger than those of male subjects. This
finding was consistent with the study results of Rubel (1995)
and Veltri and Long (1998) suggesting that subjects would be
more receptive and responded more positively to endorsers of
the same gender, as a fictitious female athlete was used as
the sports drink’s endorser in the current study. A possible
reason for this could be the “pride in gender”. Sutton &
Watlington (1994) suggested that the “Pride in gender” might
manifest itself in a preference for attending sport events
in which contestants were members of one’s own gender. From
the result of this research, it suggested that this “pride”
was also present with regard to a preference for endorsers
of ones’ own gender for female consumers, but further
investigation using male athlete endorsers was needed to see
whether this “pride” also exist among male consumers.
Research Implications
The current research suggested that when using product
endorsers, sports marketers should consider the gender and
involvement level of the target market. It suggested that a
more attractive endorser with same level of expertise would
have a more significant effect among low involvement consumers
than high involvement consumers. The reason might be that when
a consumer does not know much about a product, the first
impression and consideration on whether to purchase the
product or not would be the appearance and attractiveness of
the product. As suggested by Ohanian (1991), the use of
well-known attractive celebrities could only create initial
interest and attention for an advertisement, and such
endorsement would not necessarily result in attitude change
towards the product. But when the target market had a high
involvement level with the product, expertise of the endorser
would be a more important criterion for selecting the suitable
endorser. It was because when consumers had a high involvement
with the product, they possess knowledge about the product
thus having a higher demand for the product. It would require
an endorser with higher persuasiveness, i.e. an expert, to
persuade them rather than just good looking. To conclude, an
expert endorser should be chosen for products that sell to
consumers familiar with the product, but an attractive
endorser would be more effective when marketers wanted to
expand or explore new markets for their products and to first
introduce the product to consumers that were less involved
with it. On the other hand, although results from present
research revealed that purchase intention on a sport product
of male and female would be similar, expertise of the endorser
would have a greater positive effect on female consumers than
male consumers. In contrast with general belief that female
were more concerned about looking and appearance, endorser
of products that target female consumers should also be one
with high level of perceived expertise level to maximize it’s
effectiveness. Additionally, consistent with previous
studies, results of the current research also revealed that
endorsers of the same gender to the consumers would be more
effective than endorsers of opposite gender. This suggested
that when selling a sport-related product to female consumers,
a female athlete that was perceived as highly expert would
have the maximum endorsement effectiveness. For general,
consumers rated expertise of the endorser as more important
than attractiveness in increasing their purchase intention.
If same amount of money is required to employ either an
attractive endorser or an expert endorser for a general sports
product, the expert should be chosen. These implications would
save money and time for marketers to effectively choose a
proper endorser to increase their product sales.
Chapter 5
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Summary of Results
This study was designed to investigate how the physical
appearance (i.e., attractiveness) and the skill and knowledge
(i.e., expertise) of an endorser would influence consumers’
intention to purchase a sports drink. It also attempted to
examine how consumers of different gender and different level
of sports involvement would response to the endorser and as
a result influence the intention to purchase the sports-
related product. There were 104 males and 104 females, a total
sample size of 208 respondents, participated in this study.
Independent samples t-tests were used to test for difference
on purchase intention between subjects of high and low sports
involvement level, and also between male and female subjects.
The results showed that intention to purchase the sports drink
for high sports involvement level subjects was significantly
higher than that of low involvement subjects. But there was
no significant difference between purchase intention of male
subjects and female subjects. Moreover, the Pearson
product–moment coefficient of correlation (r) was used to test
for the relationship of attractiveness and expertise of the
endorser with purchase intention among all subjects, between
subjects of different sports involvement levels, and between
male and female subjects. The results revealed that both
attractiveness and expertise of the endorser have significant
positive relationships with purchase intention of all
subjects, subjects of high and low sports involvement levels,
and male and female subjects. Lastly, a t score is calculated
to determine if there were significant differences between
the attractiveness-purchase correlation and the
expertise-purchase correlation of different groups of
subjects. Results from the study indicated that for all
subjects, the expertise-purchase correlation was
significantly stronger than the attractiveness-purchase
correlation. For male subjects and subjects of low sports
involvement level, there was no significant differences
between their expertise-purchase correlation and their
attractiveness-purchase correlation. But for female subjects
and subjects of high sports involvement level, their
expertise-purchase correlation was significantly stronger
than their attractiveness-purchase correlation.
Conclusions
Based on the results, conclusions were made and showed as
follow:
1. There was a significant positive relationship between
the athlete endorser’s attractiveness and subjects’
intention to purchase a sports-related product.
2. There was a significant positive relationship between
the athlete endorser’s expertise and subjects’
intention to purchase a sports-related product.
3. The expertise-purchase relationship was significantly
stronger than the attractiveness-purchase
relationship among all subjects.
4. Intention to purchase a sports-related product for
subjects of high sports involvement level was
significantly higher than that for subjects of low
sports involvement level.
5. High sports involvement subjects’ expertise-purchase
relationship was significantly stronger than the
attractiveness-purchase relationship.
6. There was no significant difference between expertise-
purchase relationship and attractiveness-purchase
relationship for low sports involvement subjects.
7. There was no significant difference in intention to
purchase a sports-related product between male and
female subjects.
8. There was no significant difference between
attractiveness-purchase relationship and
expertise-purchase relationship among male subjects.
9. Female subjects’ expertise-purchase relationship was
significantly stronger than the attractiveness-
purchase relationship.
Recommendations for Further Studies
1. To avoid variations in the subjects’ knowledge and
attitude toward a familiar athlete endorser, a
fictitious endorser was used in this study. As a result
the study’s generalizability to actual athletes is
limited. Further studies should attempt to repeat this
study with real athletes.
2. As the study examined the intention to purchase a sports
drink only, it would be important to investigate
whether similar results could be obtained for other
sports products, such as sports equipments or apparel.
3. It is recommended that other factors such as subjects’
educational level, or gender and race of the endorsers
should also be compared to give a more detailed analysis
on effectiveness of athlete endorsers.
4. When attempted to find pictures for the fictitious
endorser, pictures that featured athletes engaged in
their own sports were used. It is likely that the
pictures themselves varied enough to create undesired
effects. For making a stronger generalization,
athletes that were in the same poses and in a product
endorsement setting, i.e. using photos showing the
athlete together with the product, should be used.
5. The study only focused on students of the Hong Kong
Baptist University, so the results might not be
generalized to other universities or consumers other
than university students. Further research can extend
to study also secondary school students or people at
work.
6. Qualitative studies such as semi-structured
interviews in further research would enable
researchers to probe answers and enrich the
understanding of the research questions.
In conclusion, despite the imperfections of the current
study, results indicated that expertise and attractiveness
were both positive characteristics for an athlete endorser.
And the effectiveness of the two varies from different
consumers. It is hoped that this study suggested some
considerations for sports marketers and advertisers in
developing a more systematic and effective approach to product
endorsers selection in the future.
REFERENCES
Agrawal, J., & Kamakura, W. A. (1995). The economic worth of
celebrity endorsers: An event study analysis. Journal of
Marketing, 59, 56-62.
Atkin, C., & Block, M. (1983). Effectiveness of celebrity
endorsers. Journal of Advertising Research, 23, 57-61.
Baker, M. J., & Churchill, G. A. (1977). The impact of physical
attractive models on advertising evaluations. Journal of
Marketing Research, 14(3), 538-555.
Boyd, T. C., & Shank, M. D. (2004). Athletes as product
endorsers: The effect of gender and product relatedness.
Sport Marketing Quarterly, 13(2), 82-93.
Bruning, J. L., & Kintz, B. L. (1997). Computational handbook
of statistics (4th ed.). New York: Longman.
Busch, P., & Wilson, D. T. (1976). An experimental analysis
of a saleman’s expert and referent bases of power in the
buyer-seller dyad. Journal of Marketing Research, 13,
3-11.
Caballero, M. J., Lumpkin, J. R., & Madden, C. S. (1989). Using
physical attractiveness as an advertisingtool: An
empirical test of the attractive phenomenon. Journal of
Advertising Research, 4, 16-32.
Caballero, M. J., & Solomon, P. J. (1984). Effect of Model
attractiveness on sales response. Journal of Advertising,
13(1), 17-33.
Darley, W. K., & Smith, R. E. (1993). Advertising claim
objectivity: Antecedents and effects. Journal of
Marketing, 57, 100-113.
Erdogan, B. Z. (1999). Celebrity endorsement: A literature
review. Journal of Marketing Management, 15(4), 291-314.
Erdogan, B. Z., Baker, M. J., & Tagg, S. (2001). Selecting
celebrity endorsers: the practitioner’s perspective.
Journal of Advertising Research, 41(3), 39-48.
Fink, J. S., Cunningham, G. B., & Kensicki, L. J. (2004). Using
athletes as endorsers to sell women’s sport:
Attractiveness vs. expertise. Journal of Sport Management,
18, 350-367.
Gantz, W., & Wenner, L. A. (1991). Men, women, and sports:
Audience experiences and effects. Journal of Broadcasting
and Electronic Media, 35, 233-244.
Gotlieb, J. B., Gwinner, B. F., Schlacter, J. L., & Robert
D. St. Louis. (1987). Explaining consumers’ reactions to
price changes in ervice industries: The effects of location
of the service provider, the credibility of the information
source and the importance of the service to the customer.
Journal of Professional Services Marketing, 3(1), 19-33.
Holbrook, M. B. (1986). Aims, concepts, and methods for the
representation of individual differences in esthetic
responses to design features. Journal of Consumer Research,
13, 337-347.
Homer, P. M., & Kahle, L. R. (1990). Source expertise, time
of source identification, and involvement in persuasion:
An elaborate processing perspective. Journal of
Advertising, 19(1), 30-39.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. K., & Kelly, H. H. (1953).
Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.
Isidore, C. (2003). Advertisers worry: Who’s next? Retrieved
January 12, 2007, from http://money.cnn.com/2003/07/21/
news/companies/kobe_impact/
Kahle, L., & Homer, P. (1985). Physical attractiveness of the
celebrity endoerser: A social adaptation perspective.
Journal of Consumer Research, 11(3), 954-961.
Kamins, M. A. (1990). An investigation into the match-up
hypothesis in celebrity advertising: When beauty may only
be skin deep. Journal of Advertising, 19(1), 4-13.
Maddux, J. E., & Rogers, R. W. (1980). Effects of source
expertiness, physical attractiveness, and supporting
arguments on persuasion: A case of brains over beauty.
Journal of Personality and Sociial Psychology, 39(2),
235-344.
Mazursky, D., & Schul, Y. (1992). Learning from the ad or
relying on related attitudes: The motivating role of
involvement. Journal of Business Research, 25(1), 81-93.
McCracken, G. (1989). Who is the celebrity endorser? Cultural
foundations of the endorsement process. Journal of
Consumer Research, 16, 310-321.
O’Mahony, S., & Meenaghan, T. (1997). The impact of celebrity
endorsements on cunsumers. Irish Marketing Review, 10(2),
15-24.
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.
Ohanian, R. (1991). The impact of celebrity spokespersons’
perceived image on consumers’ intention to purchase.
Journal of Advertising Research, 31(1), 46-54.
Patroshius, S. M., & Crocker, K. E. (1989). An empirical
analysis of spokesperson characteristics on advertisement
and product evaluations. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 17(3), 217-225.
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo J. T. & Schumann, D. (1983). Central
and Peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The
moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer
Research, 10, 135-146.
Preetz, T. B., Parks, J. B., & Spencer, N. E. (2004). Sport
heros as sport product endorsers: The role of gender in
the transfer of meaning process for selected undergraduate
students. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 13(2), 141-150.
Rubel, C. (1995). Women’s sports in the spotlight as
corporations become sponsors. Marketing News, 29(11), 2-4
Segrave, K. (2005). Endorsement in advertising: A social
history. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co.
Shank, M. D., & Beasley, F. (1998). Fan or fanatic: Towards
a measure of sport involvement. Journal of Sport Behavior,
21, 435-443
Speck, P. S., Schumann, D. W., & Thompson, C. (1988). Celebrity
endorsements- Scripts, schema and roles: Theoretical
framework and preliminary tests. Advances in Consumer
Research, 15, 69-76.
Sternthal, B., Philips, L. W., & Dholakia, R. (1978). The
persuasive effect of scorce credibility: A situational
analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 42, 285-314.
Sutton, W. A., & Watlington, R. (1994). Communicating with
women in the 1990s: The role of sport marketing. Sport
Marketing Quarterly, 3(2), 9-14.
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), 1-14.
Till, B. D., & Shimp, T. (1998). Endorsers in advertising:
the case of negative celebrity information. Journal of
Advertising, 27(1), 67-82.
Tripp, C., Jensen. T. D., & Carlson, L. (1994). The effect
of multiple product endorsements by celebrities on
consumer attitudes and intentions. Journal of Consumer
Research, 20(4), 535-547.
Tse, C. B. (1999). Factors affecting consumer perceptions
of product safety- The case of nondurables. Journal of
International Consumer Marketing, 12(1), 39-55.
Veltri, F. R., Kuzma, A. T., Stotlar, D. K., Viswanathan, R.,
& Miller, J. J. (2003). Athlete-endorsers: Do they affect
young consumer purchasing decision? International Journal
of Sport Management, 4, 145-160.
Veltri, F. R., & Long, S. A. (1998). A new image: Female
athlete-endorser. Cyber-Journal of Sport Marketing, 2(4).
Retrieved Feburary 23, 2007 from http://www.ausport.gov.
au/fulltext/1998/cjsm/v2n4/veltrilong24.htm
Woodside, A. G., & Davenport, J. W. (1974). The effect of
salesman similarity and expertise on consumer purchasing
behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 11(1), 198-202.
APPENDIX A
Questionnaire of the Study
This is a research about "Effect of Attractiveness and Expertise of a Sports Drink Endorser". Please use about 20 seconds to read the advertisement of the sports drink "IsoStar" on the next page, then answer the questions below. The endorser of the sports drink in the advertisement, Nicole Diaz, is a professional tennis player.
Age: Sex:
A. The athlete in the advertisement is ...
not an expert 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 an expert
not attractive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 attractive
not classy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 classy
not qualified 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 qualified
unskilled 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 skilled
ugly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 beautiful
unknowledgeable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 knowledgeable
inexperienced 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 experienced
plain 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 elegant
not sexy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 sexy
B. How likely is it that you would consider purchasing the product in this
dvertisement?
unlikely 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 likely
definitely would not 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 definitely would
improbable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 probable
C. To me, sports are...
boring 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 exciting
not interesting 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 interesting
worthless 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 valuable
not appealing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 appealing
useless 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 useful
not needed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 needed
irrelevant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 relevant
not important 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 important
THE END, THANK YOU !!