Effectiveness of Celebrity Endorsement

   

There are certain models that are often used to assess the effectiveness of celebrity endorsement. Some of the key models are as follows:

1.1.                 

1.2.                 

1.3.                 

1.4.                 

         Source Credibility Model

Source reliability model was initially suggested by Hovland (1953)and his associates  Janis and Kelley (1953). Moreover, the source reliability in an extensive sense, states to a correspondent‘s optimistic features that influence the receiver‘s recognition of a message and depend on the study in social consciousness. However, the model recommends that the efficiency of a message hinge on the alleged level of proficiency and dependability of an endorser. According to Kwon, et al (2009), exchange of all-important data throughout a reliable source for example celebrity has the impending to influence views, feelings, arrogances and attitude throughout a procedure called internalisation. However, internalisation takes place when source affect the receiver and is putative by in terms of their individual attitude and value erections (Kwon, et al., 2009).

Sundar (2008) demonstrated trustworthiness as "the listener's level of self-assurance in, and amount of acceptance of, the chatterer and the message. Moreover, trustworthiness of an endorser is perceptual and hinge on the target customer and it refers to the uprightness, honesty, and credibility of an endorser. It is noted that marketers take the benefit of these set of values by engaging celebrities those are most regarded as dependable, truthful credible and responsible among their fans and people (Sundar, 2008). However, based on a research conducted by Flanagin & Metzger (2008) it was found out that if the alleged dependability of the source is high; arrogance change is more possible to take place. On the other hand, expertise can be demonstrated as the apparent capability of an endorser to make or offer effective proclamations and it entails the information, understanding, and abilities established by the endorser whereas functioning in the similar field. However, some experts recommend that it is not imperative for an endorser to be a proficient; but it all is contingent how spectators perceive them (Flanagin & Metzger, 2008). Wheeler (2009) argued that the alleged proficiency of celebrity endorsers is more imperative than their attraction and trustworthiness in persuading buying intentions. It is observed that the expert celebrities are found to be more influential and might affect the customer purchasing choice (Wheeler, 2009).

It is noted that the outcomes in the source trustworthiness study are unclear and it refers endorsement procedure as one-dimensional for the reason that it is still tentative to say what elements create the model and what elements are more imperative than others in diverse circumstances are.  Even though, the research has demonstrated to have an important and direct influence on assertiveness and behavioural intentions, it might assist marketers in choosing appropriate endorsers however it is not the mere element that must be considered in choosing celebrity endorsers (Carroll, 2009).

         Source Attractiveness Model

Jackson (2008) stated, "Physical attraction is an informational cue contains effects that are elusive, prevalent, and inevitable" and Jackson (2008) supported the use of striking supporters than average looking backers. According to Keel & Nataraajan (2012) most of the people try to their attraction and react confidently to the endorsers who look like them. On the other hand, at times people have a tendency to think that striking people are much smarter and therefore excel in other areas as well (Keel & Nataraajan, 2012).

It is found that the source attractiveness model is measured as an element of the source pelmet model and centred on the study in societal psychology. Moreover, the source attraction model focussed on four different areas; specifically understanding information of source, amiability fondness for source based on their bodily looks or attitude, correspondence similarity between the source and the respondent, and allure. It recommends that the usefulness of a message hinge on source‘s understanding, congeniality, resemblance, and allure to the receiver of the message (Halonen-Knight & Hurmerinta, 2010).

According to Ilicic & Webster (2011) dealers select superstar endorsers centred on their bodily attraction to take advantage of their both qualities for instance star status and bodily appeal. However, the print announcements depict the significance of bodily attraction and most of the investigators have found that good-looking people are more active that unappealing people at encouragement, altering views and activating purchase decision. Moreover, resemblance can be demonstrated as the apparent similarity between the basis and the respondent, understanding as knowness of regarding the source all the way through understanding, and amiability as the amount of affection, attention and liking for the source in the respondent due to the source‘s bodily characteristics and attitude. Attraction of the source doesn‘t merely increases due to the bodily attributes; it might also contain the numerous other features like knowledgeable skill, standard of living and so on (Ilicic & Webster, 2011).

Tingchi Liu & Brock (2011) smeared this approach in promotion recommended that the physical attraction of source chooses the efficiency of convincing communication all the way through a procedure called identification. It occurs when the receiver admits the data from an eye-catching source as a desire to be recognised with supporter (Tingchi Liu & Brock, 2011).

It is observed that in further study regarding gender collaboration between sources and respondent, it was found out that the source has a greater influence of encouragement and purpose to buy on the respondent of differing sex. Tantiseneepong, et al (2012) found that good-looking female models initiate more optimistic arrogance and buying intention than their masculine colleagues across both sexes particularly among males. Whereas, Patra & Datta (2010) contrasting the statement by disagreeing that source and respondent of the similar sex lead to larger intentions to buy, males show better buying intention from male followers and vice versa (Patra & Datta, 2010). On the other hand Eisend & Langner (2010) found that source‘s sex had no influence on respondent‘s behaviour towards ads or on buying behaviour either. Furthermore, the academic outcomes about gender or cross gender collaborations between source and respondent are superficies and doesn‘t offer any directions to marketers (Eisend & Langner, 2010).

However, the above opinions lead to the outcome that good-looking celebrity supporters might enrich the assertiveness towards a brand but not essentially result into real behaviour, intellectual attitudes, and buying intention.

              Product Match up Model

It is noticed that the match-up theory recommends that the efficiency of an ad hinge on the presence of an apparent 'fit' amid the endorsing star and the brand endorsed by them. Moreover, the product match-up model proposes that the Celebrity and Product characteristics must accompaniment each other for active promotion. However, the contest between the product and star hinge on the mutual qualities between product features and the image of a celebrity. Promotion through a star with comparatively high product compatibleness directs to viable advertising as equated to an ad performing less companionable superstar. In addition, if the qualities of a star match up with the brand recognised by them, it might also upsurge the celebrity credibility and attraction between the targeted audiences. Koernig & Boyd (2009) supported the argument by uttering that it is perilous to employ superstars who openly look like to the brand and are specialists in their related field (Koernig & Boyd, 2009).

Biswas, et al (2009) contended that if an organisation can efficaciously connect a relation amid its product and celebrity appearance or the field superstar specifies in, then it might bring distinction and accomplishment to both. Moreover, preceding study on the matter states that consumers also anticipate the compatibleness between the product and the star. However, clients create an apparent image regarding the product by associating the characteristics of the product and celebrity. On the other hand, if there is not similarity between the product and the celebrity then it might lead an individual to a decision that the star is falsifying it from the time when they are courteously paid to endorse the product. It is noticed from the above urgings, it might be incidental that correspondence between the star and brand is necessary for effective promotion. Otherwise, if the star and the endorsed product have nothing in common it might clue to predator outcome where star dominate the endorsed commodity and the targeted customer merely evokes the celebrity not the commodity (Biswas, et al., 2009).

It is found that the product match-up model proposes that good-looking stars particularly attractive female stars are more viable for endorsing beauty products and the stuff used to increase ones attraction.  Dix, et al (2010) argued that the use of star endorsers is appropriate where product purchases include high psychosomatic and societal threat (Dix, et al., 2010). Moreover, by supporting the argument, Ogunsiji (2012) suggested that the stars endorsement approach is more useful for luxury commodities placed and sold in the niche marketplace segment for the reason that the presented stars are individualfrom the high position and consequently it turns out to be easy for marketers to entice customers to purchase their products (Ogunsiji, 2012). Carlson & Donavan (2008) disparate the argument by saying that customers are usually influenced by stars if commodities are cheap and low encompassing (Carlson & Donavan, 2008).

However, after considering the outcomes and views, it turns out to be understandable that the Match-up amid the endorsed brand and celebrity is imperative in order to encourage the targeted customers and to create the message more viable.

          Meaning Transfer Model

According to Charbonneau & Garland (2010), the preceding source models demonstrated above are not able of apprehension the success elements of the endorsement procedure (Charbonneau & Garland, 2010). Lord & Putrevu (2009) supported the argument by uttering that neither of the source reliability, attraction or match-up theories models offers a base for suitable star endorser selection. Moreover, some issues are linked to the models that are as follows:

·         These models do not offer actions to tackle the multidimensionality of basis effects

·         They might overlook implication-meaning dealings between a product and celebrity

·         There is a deficiency of enumerated experiential foundation for purposed proportions

Therefore, McCracken suggested the meaning transfer model and the core idea of this approach is to demonstrate that stars own exclusive sets of meanings, which can be convenient to the products sanctioned by them. Moreover, this considered model recommends that the efficacy of a superstar endorser hinge on their quality to get the significances to the endorsement procedure. However, a star owns an extensive amount of different meanings, differences of position, class, sex, and age, as well as character and way of life types, are characterised in the pool of accessible superstars, placing an extremely numerous and understated pallet of meanings at the removal of the advertising structure.

It is noted that the celebrity endorsements are an exclusive instance of a more common procedure of meaning transmission. According to Charbonneau & Garland (2010) there is an organised way for the transferral of cultural significance in customers’ societies. According to Flanagin & Metzger (2008)  meaning initiates as somewhat resident in the socially established world, in the bodily and societal world established by the classes and values of the usual culture. Moreover, the promotion and the style system ease the meaning transmission from the socially established world to customer’s commodities and from those products to the individual customers; it is executed throughout the individual exertions of the customers (Flanagin & Metzger, 2008).

Doss (2011) stated that the meaning transfer approach demonstrates a three-stage procedure and it starts when the promoter recognises the social meanings projected for the product and chooses what they wants the commodity to say. Moreover, the promoter looks for the matters, individuals, and circumstances that might give opinion to these meanings for example celebrities. However, in the initial phase the meanings linked with the celebrities transfers from the supporter to the product or the brand, and this implication is drawn out of the superstar‘s community image. In the subsequent phase, this meaning is transmitted from the supporter to the commodity and the procedure of forming a product character takes place. This procedure is centred on the symbolic belongings carried by the endorser and once meanings have been progressed into products, they should be conveyed to customers. Finally, in the last stage called ingesting procedure, the brand connotation is attained by the customers and they identify the symbolic properties of commodity and transfer them into meanings for themselves by placing them to work in the erection of their self-perception. When this is completed, the undertaking of the meaning is finish and the final phase of this consider model elaborate the significance of the customer in the endorsement procedure (Doss, 2011).