![]() ![]() |
![]() |
UFDC Home | myUFDC Home | Help |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Full Text | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
BEAUTY MATCH-UP AND SELF-CONCEPT CONGRUITY IN ADVERTISING By DANAE BARULICH A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ADVERTISING UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2006 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first like to thank my family for their guidance and financial support during my whole academic career. I would also like to thank my friends and classmates for their continued support and encouragement throughout this whole process. Finally, I would like to thank the members of my committee for their time put into this project. I would especially like to thank the chair of my committee, Dr. John Sutherland. This project would not be complete without his assistance. TABLE OF CONTENTS A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S .................................................................................................. ii LIST OF TABLES ......................... ...... ............. ....... ..... .... ............... v ABSTRACT .............. ......................................... vi CHAPTER 1 IN TRODU CTION ................................................. ...... ................. 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .............................................................................5 B e au ty ......................................................................................................... . 5 F e m a le B e au ty .............................................................................................................. 5 C om m ercial Fem ale B eauty ............................................................................. 9 Effect of Com m ercial B eauty .................................... .... .......................... ...... 9 E effect on F em ale A udiences.................................................................... .. .... 13 M atch -U p E effect ................................................................................................... 15 The Celebrity M atch-Up Hypothesis........................................ ............... 15 The Beauty Match-Up Hypothesis ........................................ ...............19 B eauty T ypes ................................................................... 23 S e lf-C o n c e p t .....................................................................................................2 4 N eed for P resent R research ........................................................................... ......... 29 C conclusion ...................................................................................................... ....... 30 3 M E T H O D O L O G Y ........................................................................ ....................... 3 1 R e se arch D e sig n ................................................................................................... 3 1 B rand Selection .................................................................................................. .....32 Instrumentation ............... ......... .......................33 S a m p le .................................................................................................................. 3 4 M easurem ent .................................................................................................34 D ata P ro cessin g ................................................................ 3 5 4 R E S U L T S .............................................................................3 7 Sample Demographics ..... ........... ........ .......... ........37 M manipulation C hecks ............................................................................ ........... 37 Cute/Sexy Validation.................................................. 37 Attitude Toward Models and Products.....................................................39 Models' Fit with Beauty Types: Hypothesis Testing ..........................................41 Hypothesis 1: A model with a Sensual/Sexual beauty type will match up to a product with a Sensual/Sexual brand image .............................. ..................41 Hypothesis 2: A model with a Young Feminine, or cute beauty type will match up to a product with a Young Feminine, or cute brand image .............42 Relationship Between Fit and Attitude Toward the Model.....................................44 Research Question: Is attitude toward a model related to how well the model's perceived personality fits the respondent's self-concept?..................45 P personality Fit and Product Fit ....................................................................... ...... 47 5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS......................................................................50 Sum m ary of R esults......... .................................................................. .. .... .. .... .. 50 H y p oth esis O n e .................................................. ................ 50 H hypothesis T w o .................................................................................. 5 1 R research Question ............................................... .. ...... .. ............ 51 C conclusion ............................................................... .... ..... ........ 52 Lim stations ...................................... .......................... .... ..... ........ 53 Im plications for A advertisers ............................................... ............................ 54 F future R research ........................................................................55 APPENDIX QUESTIONNAIRE...................... ....... ............................ 56 LIST OF REFEREN CES ............................................................................. 71 B IO G R A PH IC A L SK E TCH ..................................................................... ..................74 LIST OF TABLES Table page 2-1 Strongest, Weakest, and Middle Examples of Beauty Dimensions....................24 3-1 Perfum e A dvertisem ents......................................................... ............... 33 4-1 Sam ple D description ........ ................................................................ .... .... ... ..38 4-2 Means for Girl-next-door/Sex-Kitten (2 = Very GND, -2 = Very SK) .................39 4-3 Means for Cute/Sensual-Exotic (2 = Very C, -2 = Very S/E) ............................39 4-4 Attitudes toward the Models (2 = favorable and -2 = unfavorable) ....................40 4-5 Attitudes toward the Products (2 = favorable and -2 =unfavorable) ...................40 4-6 Means for Cosmopolitan Match-Up (2 = Very Good Fit, -2 = Very Bad Fit).......41 4-7 Means for CK Obsession Match-Up (2 = Very Good Fit, -2 = Very Bad Fit)......42 4-8 Means for Seventeen Match-Up (2 = Very Good Fit, -2 = Very Bad Fit).............43 4-9 Means for Clinique Happy Match-Up (2 = Very Good Fit, -2 = Very Bad Fit)....44 4-10 Fit and Attitude Toward M odel Relationship ................................... ............... 45 4-11 Attitude and Personality Fit Regression for Model A ........................................46 4-12 Attitude and Personality Fit Regression for Model D ........................................46 4-13 Attitude and Personality Fit Regression for Model C...........................................47 4-14 Attitude and Personality Fit Regression for Model B............................................47 4-15 P personality and P product F its ....................................................... .....................49 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Advertising BEAUTY MATCH-UP AND SELF-CONCEPT CONGRUITY IN ADVERTISING By Danae Barulich August 2006 Chair: John Sutherland Major Department: Journalism and Communications A beauty match-up seems to exist with endorsers in advertisements. Certain types of beauty are better matched with certain types of products. Also, advertisements have been found to be more effective when the image of the product matches the self-image of the viewer of the ad. The current study uses two dimensions of beauty, cute and sexy, to determine if there is a match-up effect with two product categories, magazines and perfumes, using repeated measures analysis of variance. This study also includes a personality dimension. Rather than testing the congruence between brand image and respondents' self-image, respondents' self-images are compared with the models' perceived personalities using stepwise multiple regression. The research will determine which models are best suited for use with certain products and a certain target audience. CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION While the ideal image of female beauty has changed over the past century, the characteristics of beauty that have remained constant are the youthful look, symmetrical facial features, and body ratios. These characteristics have been found to exemplify the ideal image of beauty both over time and cross-culturally (Fallon, 1990; Sarwer, Magee and Clark, 2004). The shared beauty ideals held across cultures that make up the youthful look are firm breasts and hips, roundness instead of angular shapes, fleshiness rather than flab, and smooth unblemished skin (Fallon, 1990). Symmetry in facial features have also been seen as more attractive than asymmetrical features (Rhodes, Roberts and Simmons, 1999; Sarwer et al., 2004). Body ratios are another characteristic used over time and across cultures to define beauty (Singh, 1993; Singh, 1994). Fallon (1990) notes that more uniform standards of beauty have been imposed throughout the world since the rise of mass media in the 20th century. Beauty is often used to sell products and services in advertising. Research has shown that physically attractive spokespeople can add to the effectiveness of an advertisement (Joseph, 1982). Physically attractive spokespeople have been found to have a positive effect on evaluation of the ad, purchase behavior, and can also attract attention (Baker and Churchill, 1977; Caballero and Solomon, 1984; Caballero and Pride, 1984). It has also been found that beautiful models in advertising attract attention when women compare themselves to the models in the ads (Martin and Kennedy, 1994; Martin and Gentry, 1997). Research has found that the image of the model in the ad must match the image of the product being advertised (Peterson and Kerin, 1977; Lynch and Schuler, 1994). This pairing of beauty and products is known as the Match-Up Hypothesis. Research conducted regarding celebrity endorsers reveals that the physical attractiveness of celebrity endorsers would enhance products and advertisements only if the characteristics of the products match-up with the image of a specific celebrity (Friedman and Friedman, 1979; Kamins, 1990). Studies have found that an attractive celebrity leads to higher credibility, purchase intent and a more positive attitude toward the advertisement than a less attractive celebrity (Kahle and Homer, 1985; Kamins, 1990; Till and Busler, 2000). Building further on the Match-Up Hypothesis, it was found that multiple categories of beauty exist: Classic Beauty/Feminine, Sensual/Exotic, Sex-Kitten, Trendy, Cute, and Girl-Next-Door. Of these different beauty types, certain categories are more appropriately paired with specific products than with others. It has been shown that a model whose type of beauty and associated image matches the product with which it is paired in an advertisement provides a more coherent message (Solomon et al., 1992). Also, if this message is consistent with a consumer's desired self-image this may further enhance acceptance of the advertisement. Studies have shown that there are several different types of beauty depicted by female models, and physical attractiveness appears to be a complex multidimensional concept rather than a simple and unitary continuum. Further research on the different beauty types of female models reveals that there are two main contrasting dimensions of beauty Sensual/Sexual and Young Feminine (Huckeba, 2005). The study concludes that women desire to be more like the Young Feminine models and in turn will purchase the products they endorse more readily than they would a product endorsed by a more Sensual/Sexual model (Huckeba, 2005). Self-concept can be defined as the way a person sees themselves including both physical and psychological characteristics. Rather than an objective point of view, self- concept is a subjective point of view about oneself (Mehta, 1999). Congruence between self-concept and image of products has been found to enhance the acceptance of advertisements. Research has found that advertisements are more effective when the image of the brand in the ad is similar to the self-images of the viewers of the ads (Hong and Zinkhan, 1995; Mehta, 1999). The current study will build on previous research regarding model beauty types in advertising. Four unknown models (one in the Sensual/Sexual category, one in the Young Feminine, category, one in between these categories, and one exhibiting neither beauty type) will be tested against four different brands. The brands will consist of two magazines and two perfumes. One magazine (Cosmopolitan) and one perfume (CK Obsession) show characteristics of the Sensual/Sexual category while the other magazine (Seventeen) and perfume (Clinique Happy) show characteristics of the Young Feminine, or cute category. Building on previous research, the current study will lead to a better understanding of how female college students feel about beauty images in advertising. The study will determine whether or not the models will match-up to the brands that exhibit the same characteristics as their beauty types. Previous research concentrates on the models' looks; this study will also include a personality aspect. Respondents will be asked to indicate what they believe each model's personality to be. In addition, they 4 will be asked to indicate whether or not each model's perceived personality matches the respondents' self-concepts. CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Beauty Beauty can be defined as "qualities that give pleasure to the senses or exalt the mind" (Mish, 1989, 78). Over time, youthfulness, symmetry, and body ratios have been identified as the ideal image of human beauty (Sarwer, Magee and Clark, 2004). For research purposes, physical attractiveness of individuals is most often determined by a panel of judges asked to rate the appearance of one or more individuals (Joseph, 1982). Physical attractiveness of models used in advertisements has been shown to have positive effects on viewers. Physically attractive models have been found to be credible, attention-getting, persuasive, and were seen as experts, as well as having an effect on purchase (Baker and Churchill, 1977; Joseph, 1982; Caballero and Pride, 1984; Bower and Landreth, 2001). The focus of the current study is on female beauty and how different dimensions of beauty match-up to different products. Female Beauty Sarwer et al. (2004) explain that beauty can be characterized by physical features including youthfulness, symmetry, and body ratios. The physical features that are seen as indicators of beauty are clear skin, bright eyes, and lustrous hair (Zerbowitz, Olson and Hoffman, 1993). Youthfulness or a youthful appearance is an important determinant of beauty. Previous research has suggested that attractiveness declines with age, especially with women (Zerbowitz et al., 1993). Symmetry in facial features has also been found to be a determinant of beauty. Research has shown that both men and women with more symmetrical facial features are seen as more attractive than those with asymmetrical features (Rhodes, Roberts and Simmons, 1999; Sarwer et al., 2004). Rhodes et al. (1999) used two different ways of transforming a normal face to create a perfectly symmetrical face. The first technique was to reflect one-half of the face down the middle, vertically. The other technique was to morph the face with its mirror image. Rhodes et al. (1999) found that the morphs were more attractive than the original faces, but the vertical reflections were less attractive than the original face. The researchers concluded that the vertical reflections were less attractive because they were found to be stranger and more distinctive than the original face, making them atypical. Rhodes at al. (1999) concluded that facial symmetry is attractive and can be considered an attribute that makes a face more attractive. Another determinant of beauty is body ratios, specifically the waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) (Singh, 1993; Singh, 1994). With an ideal rating of .7, the WHR is a proportion of fat stored around the waist and hips (Singh, 1993). Research has shown that men tend to rate women with a low WHR as more attractive than women with a high WHR (Singh, 1993). Singh (1994) proposed that ideal female body shape and attractiveness is more influenced by WHR than body size in general. The researcher used six female figures, three heavier figures with lower WHRs and three thinner figures with higher WHRs. Both male and female respondents indicated a preference for the heavier figures with the lowest WHR as the ideal female body (Singh, 1994). The figures with low WHRs were seen as more attractive and healthy than the figures with high WHRs. The researcher concluded that the "female body shape, independent of overall body size, is an important determinant of female attractiveness and healthiness" (Singh, 1994, 287) Sarwer et al. (2004) note that the preference for the above mentioned characteristics of female beauty is cross-cultural. Also, preference appears "to be 'wired-in' rather than conditioned by exposure to societal standards of beauty" (Sarwer et al., 2004, 31). The characteristics used to define beauty (youthfulness, symmetry, and body ratios) have been stable across time in the United States. The only change in ideal beauty is the result of a change in preferred body ratios. In the United States, the ideal image of beauty has changed from thin to voluptuous and back to thin again over the last century (Sarwer et al., 2004). During the beginning of the 20th century, two female beauty ideals existed. The first ideal was a woman with fragile and delicate features while the other ideal was a full-figured woman (Mazur, 1986). These two beauty ideals were called the steel engraving lady and the voluptuous woman. The only physical similarity they had was a corseted waistline. The steel engraving lady was seen as delicate and frail and was admired for her moral values and social status. On the other hand, the voluptuous woman had a heavy physique and was seen as being sexy (Fallon, 1990). After the steel engraving lady and the voluptuous woman, the Gibson Girl appeared. She was a combination of the previous ideal beauty types along with some new features. The Gibson Girl had a long and slender body but it was not frail and delicate like the steel engraving lady's build. The Gibson girl had the large bust and hips of the voluptuous woman. Additionally, the Gibson Girl had a corseted chest, graceful slim legs, rounded calves, and narrow ankles (Fallon, 1990). A more androgynous shape became the ideal image of beauty after World War I (Mazur, 1986). Flat-chested flappers replaced the curvaceous beauty ideal. In the 1920s the ideal beauty image for women became almost boy-like. Rather than a shapely body, make-up and exposed legs played an important role in the ideal beauty image during this time (Fallon, 1990). The flapper beauty ideal ended as the depression began (Fallon, 1990). In the 1940s a more curvaceous ideal image emerged which was demonstrated by the American pinup girls (Mazur, 1986). Also during the 1940s, women's legs began to play a role as an erotic symbol (Fallon, 1990). The hour-glass figure exhibited by Marilyn Monroe became the ideal of the 1950s (Mazur, 1986). During this time beauty ideals included large busts with cleavage, tiny cinched waists, and high heels (Fallon, 1990). In the 1960s the beauty ideal shifted back to a taller and slimmer figure (Sarwer et al., 2004). Twiggy, a 97 pound model with 31-22-32 measurements was seen as a fashion icon at the time and was all over magazines like Seventeen and Vogue (Fallon, 1990). At the beginning of the 1970s, preferred physical features for a woman included slender bodies, small buttocks, and middle or small sized busts (Fallon, 1990). This thin ideal continued throughout the 1970s and for the most part is still seen as the ideal beauty type. In the 1990s a new beauty ideal of defined muscles along with thinness emerged. In some instances the thin muscular image is accompanied by a larger breast size (Sarwer et al., 2004). Beauty is important to study because it affects everyday life. People judge themselves and others according to their ideal image of beauty. For example, women (more so than men) use their own beauty as a measure of self-worth (Fallon, 1990). There is a general agreement among researchers that attractiveness leads perceivers to have positive evaluations of an attractive subject (Eagly, Ashmore, Makhijani and Longo, 1991). Eagly et al. (1991) reviewed previous literature regarding the beauty-is-good stereotype and predicted that attractive subjects would be assigned more positive qualities than unattractive subjects. It was found that perceivers assumed that what is beautiful is good, but the beauty-is-good effects depended on the inference the perceiver was asked to make. The researchers concluded that good looks have little impact on beliefs about attractive subjects' integrity and concern for others. However, good looks generated strong inferences about social skills and weaker inference about having influence, adjustment, and intellectual capability (Eagly et al., 1991). Beauty is also used by advertisers in a commercial role in order to sell products and services. Commercial Female Beauty Beauty is used by advertisers to sell a variety of products and services ranging from cosmetics to electronics. The three types of endorsers typically used in advertising include the celebrity, the professional or expert, and the typical consumer (Friedman and Friedman, 1979). Celebrity endorsers include those who are known to the public for achievements in areas other than the product they are endorsing, such as an athlete or an actor/actress. An expert endorser is one that has extensive knowledge of the product category or the product itself. Lastly, a typical consumer endorser is an ordinary person (Friedman and Friedman, 1979). Effect of Commercial Beauty The advertising industry has recognized the impact and value of using attractive models and celebrities in ads (Joseph, 1982). Advertisers believe that physically attractive spokespeople can add to the effectiveness of an advertisement. They also see beautiful spokespeople as being credible and are generally liked more than unattractive spokespeople (Joseph, 1982). Baker and Churchill (1977) found that physically attractive models in ads added to the attention-getting value of the advertisement as well as the evaluators' liking of the advertisement. Joseph (1982) found that attractive models contribute to a communication's effectiveness in important but limited ways. When an attractive model is used, respondents have more favorable evaluations of both the advertisement and the product being advertised. However, attractive sources generally have not been perceived to be more expert, trustworthy, honest, knowledgeable, or intelligent than unattractive sources. Joseph (1982) found evidence that physical attractiveness can be persuasive. This persuasiveness is weakened when both the attractive and unattractive sources are described as being experts (Joseph, 1982). Caballero and Solomon (1984) found that the presence of a model increased the product's appeal by conducting a study to determine if model attractiveness had an effect on purchasing behavior. The researchers used point-of-purchase displays with high, medium, and low attractive male and female models paired with beer (a high involvement item) and facial tissue (a low involvement item). The two products were also advertised without a model. Results of the study indicated that the point-of-purchase displays with models outperformed the ones without a model, which supports the idea that the presence of a model increases a product's appeal. It was also found that the high involvement product (beer) had higher sales among both males and females when the model was male. Low attractiveness was found to produce more sales for the low involvement product (facial tissue). The researchers concluded that the low attractive model could have increased the awareness of the point-of purchase display. Caballero and Solomon (1984) concluded that using models that are rated as being low in attractiveness could be useful for gaining attention for low involvement products. It has been found that attractive female models have a positive effect on purchase of the product they are advertising (Caballero and Pride, 1984). Caballero and Pride (1984) used models portrayed as sales representatives in a direct mail advertisement to assess purchase behavior of recipients. Low, medium, and highly attractive male and female models were placed in a direct mail advertisement for a book. Additionally, there was one advertisement with no model. The model in the advertisements represented the vice president of marketing for the publishing company. Subscribers to a magazine received the direct mail piece with one of the models or no model at all and were allowed six weeks to respond. Results indicated that the advertisement with the highly attractive female produced greater sales than any other version of the ad (Caballero and Pride, 1984). These results indicate that attractive models, particularly attractive female models have an effect on purchase. Research has determined that attractive models are linked to higher quality products (Parekh and Kanekar, 1994). Parekh and Kanekar (1994) studied the expected behavior of an attractive woman versus the expected behavior of an unattractive woman. One attractive model and one unattractive model were both dressed in elegant and non- elegant clothing resulting in four different full-length color photographs. Respondents were asked to indicate the quality of four different products, two beauty products (soap and shampoo) and two non-beauty products (stationary and a ball-point pen) that they thought each model was likely to choose. Parekh and Kanekar (1994) found that respondents indicated the attractive model was more likely to choose higher quality products. Higher quality products were also expected to be purchased by the model dressed in elegant clothing. Also, product quality for the beauty products was higher for the attractive model (Parekh and Kanekar, 1994). Highly attractive models have been perceived as experts when paired with enhancing products (Bower and Landreth, 2001). Bower and Landreth (2001) explored the effects of highly attractive models (HAMs) versus normally attractive models (NAMs) in advertising. HAMs have been defined as being thin and having beautiful facial features while NAMs are said to have a more average weight, height, and facial beauty. The researchers paired HAMs and NAMs with two different categories of attractiveness related products, problem-solving products and enhancing products. A problem-solving is one that "serves to fix or hide beauty liabilities or flaws such as acne or dandruff" (Bower and Landreth, 2001, 2). Enhancing products are those that serve a more aesthetic purpose rather than concealing imperfections (Bower and Landreth, 2001). The researchers hypothesized that NAMs would be perceived as more trustworthy than HAMs. HAMs were expected to have greater perceived expertise when paired with enhancing products while NAMs were expected to have greater perceived expertise when paired with problem-solving products. It was also hypothesized that HAMs would be more effective than NAMs when paired with enhancing products. Finally, the researchers hypothesized that advertisements with problem-solving products would be more effective when paired with NAMs than HAMs (Bower and Landreth, 2001). The two products chosen from the enhancing product category were lipstick and earrings. The two products chosen from the problem-solving product category were acne concealer and acne medication. Two models that had the same hair and eye color were chosen to represent the HAM and NAM. Each of the four products was placed with each model in an advertisement (Bower and Landreth, 2001). Results of the study revealed that there is no difference in using NAMs versus HAMs on perceived trustworthiness, which did not support the first hypothesis. When associated with enhancing products HAMs were seen as having a greater expertise than NAMs, which supports the second hypothesis. The third hypothesis was not supported because the results showed that NAMs were not seen as having greater expertise with problem-solving products. Respondents indicated higher evaluations of the ads for enhancing products when paired with HAMs. However, ads for problem-solving products were not evaluated more positively when paired with NAMs versus HAMs. Overall the results indicate that HAMs are best paired with enhancing products and that "there is no advantage in pairing problem-solving products with HAMs instead of NAMs" (Bower and Landreth, 2001, 6). Effect on Female Audiences Previous research provides support that beauty attracts attention when used in advertising. It has been found that viewers compare themselves to attractive models in advertising (Martin and Kennedy, 1994; Martin and Gentry, 1997). The three motives for comparison include self-evaluation, self-enhancement, and self-improvement (Martin and Kennedy, 1994). Martin and Kennedy (1994) conducted a study focused on female adolescents and their motive for comparing their physical attractiveness to that of models in advertising. To determine which motives predominate when adolescents compare themselves to models, a group of students were given an illustration with a female looking at a model in a magazine ad. The students were asked to indicate what the female in the illustration might be thinking and what might happen next. Results of the study revealed that self-evaluation and self-improvement were common motives for comparison among adolescents. Self-enhancement was not found to be a motive in any of the student answers. Self-evaluation was the most common motive, with most responses leaning toward the negative side. For example, some respondents thought that the female looking at the magazine wanted to be like the model in the ad and was upset because the model was prettier than she was (Martin and Kennedy, 1994). Martin and Gentry (1997) conducted a study to determine the impact of highly attractive models on female pre-adolescents and adolescents. The researchers found that the participants' self-perceptions and self-esteem were affected with self-evaluation as the motive for comparison. Participants were given advertisements with highly attractive models paired with three fictitious products (hair care, lipstick, and jeans) including headlines and body copy with self-evaluation as a motive for comparison. For example, the headline for the hair care product read "Do You Look This Good?" (Martin and Gentry, 1997, 25). Self-perception of physical attractiveness was lowered in all participants after viewing the ads. Other participants were given the same ads, but the headlines and body copy used self-improvement and self-enhancement as motives for comparison. The self-improvement headline for the hair care product read "If Only You Knew How to Look This Good!" while the self-enhancement headline read "If They Only Knew How Good You Look!" (Martin and Gentry, 1997, 25). These participants' self-perceptions of physical attractiveness were raised after viewing the ads (Martin and Gentry, 1997). These studies clearly indicate that models in ads attract attention and that females tend to compare themselves to those models, which makes selection of the most appropriate model essential. Match-Up Effect Peterson and Kerin (1977) suggest that model/product congruency is needed in advertisements to enhance viewers' perceptions of the ad. In other words, the image of the model must match the image of the product. Three different types of models, the demure model, the seductive model, and the nude model were all placed with two different products, body oil and a ratchet wrench set. The advertisement using the seductive model and body oil was found to be the most appealing one containing the highest quality product produced by the most reputable company in the respondent's opinion. This study suggests that product and model congruency in advertising is necessary. When high congruency between a product and a model occurs, the model's role in the advertisement is communicative, their presence is necessary to express the desired message (Peterson and Kerin, 1977). Results of a study (Lynch and Schuler, 1994) show that a higher level of perceived expertise was found when there was congruence between a model's physical appearance and a product. A study testing the perceived expertise of a male model was conducted by Lynch and Schuler (1994). The researchers used a male model at three different levels of muscularity paired with several products used to help produce muscularity as well as products that are traditionally targeted to males. Results of the study indicated that the model's perceived expertise about exercise equipment and male-targeted products increased as muscularity of the model increased (Lynch and Schuler, 1994). The Celebrity Match-Up Hypothesis Several studies regarding attractiveness and the use of celebrities in advertisements have been conducted (Friedman and Friedman. 1979; Kahle and Homer, 1985; Kamins, 1990; Till and Busier, 2000). These studies reveal that consumer evaluation of the product in the ad depends on the endorser/product match-up. Identification and internalization are two possible factors that influence how well an endorser will work for a given product. When consumers mimic the behavior of the endorser because they derive satisfaction from the idea that they are like the endorser, this is identification. When consumers mimic the behavior of the endorser because they believe in the attitude or behavior, this is internalization (Friedman and Friedman, 1979). A study conducted by Friedman and Friedman attempted to determine "whether or not the effectiveness of an endorser type is dependent upon the type of product being endorsed" (Friedman and Friedman, 1979, 64). The researchers hypothesized that the celebrity endorsers would be evaluated more favorably when paired with products high in psychological and/or social risk. Expert endorsers were hypothesized to be evaluated more favorably when paired with products high in financial, performance, and/or physical risk. Finally, typical consumer endorsers were hypothesized to be evaluated more favorably when paired with low risk products (Friedman and Friedman, 1979). Three products, one from each category, were chosen to be compared to the three endorser types. The product chosen for high psychological and social risk was costume jewelry. The product chosen for high in financial, performance, and physical risk was a vacuum cleaner. The final product, which was thought to be low on all types of risk, was a box of cookies. Three endorsers were also chosen including a fictitious expert, a typical consumer, and a celebrity. Because she was rated the highest on awareness, likableness, attractiveness, and trustworthiness, the celebrity chosen for the study was Mary Tyler Moore. Twelve different print ads were made using all endorser and product combinations (Friedman and Friedman, 1979). The results confirmed that consumer evaluation of advertising does depend on the product/endorser combination. Subjects rated advertisements using the celebrity the highest with costume jewelry as the product and lowest when the product being endorsed was a vacuum cleaner. The advertisement for the vacuum cleaner was rated the highest in combination with the expert endorser. Finally, the advertisement using the typical- consumer was rated the highest when the product was the box of cookies (Friedman and Friedman, 1979). Kahle and Homer (1985) conducted a study to determine purchase intent and attitude toward a product (disposable razors) after exposure to advertisements with an attractive and unattractive celebrity endorser. Results indicated that respondents were more likely to purchase the product when the endorser in the ad was an attractive celebrity versus an unattractive celebrity. It was also found that respondents who were exposed to the ad with the attractive celebrity liked the product more after seeing to the ads. In addition to purchase intent and positive attitude toward the product, brand recall for the razor was higher among respondents who were shown the ad with the attractive celebrity (Kahle and Homer, 1985). The Celebrity Match-Up Hypothesis suggests that in order for an advertisement to be effective, the message conveyed by the image of the celebrity endorser must converge with the image of the product. There must be congruence between the product image and the celebrity image based on attractiveness. Kamins (1990) conducted a study to test the importance of attractiveness of a celebrity endorser in addition to their image matching up with the product's image. The researchers hypothesized that an attractive celebrity should have a positive impact on evaluations of the advertisement and product that is attractiveness related. It was also hypothesized that the attractive celebrity would have no effect on evaluations of the advertisement and product that is not attractiveness related (Kamins, 1990). Two celebrities were chosen for use in the study, Tom Selleck as the attractive celebrity and Telly Savalas as the unattractive celebrity. The attractiveness related product chosen was a luxury car and the product that was least related to attractiveness was a home computer. Four different advertisements were created using all combinations of the two celebrities and products. Results showed that the attractive celebrity led to higher spokesperson credibility and a more positive attitude towards the ad versus the less attractive celebrity. However, the results were only applicable to the attractiveness- related product (the luxury car). A match-up between an attractive celebrity spokesperson and an attractiveness-related product was found (Kamins, 1990). Till and Busler (2000) conducted a study to examine not only the physical attractiveness as a match-up factor, but also the role of endorser expertise as a match-up factor. The researchers hypothesized that the use of an attractive celebrity endorser for a product used to enhance one's attractiveness would have a positive effect on attitude towards the brand and purchase intention. A fictitious celebrity endorser was created along with two fictitious products, a pen and a men's cologne to be used in a print ad that was to be shown to undergraduate college students (Till and Busler, 2000). Results showed that both brand attitude and purchase intent were higher for the attractive endorser for both the cologne and the pen. The match-up theory however was not supported based on the endorser's physical attractiveness. The attractive endorser was seen as a better fit and more appropriate for both products (Till and Busler, 2000). The researchers (Till and Busler, 2000) also hypothesized that a celebrity endorser for a product that matches the endorser's area of expertise will have a greater positive effect on brand attitude and purchase intention. Two fictitious products, candy bars and energy bars were used in the study. The products were paired with a fictitious actor and a fictitious athlete. Results indicated that brand attitude for the energy bar was significantly higher when the endorser was an athlete. The findings of both studies show that fit plays a major role in the Match-Up Hypothesis (Till and Busler, 2000). The research done with spokespeople in advertisements has shown a match-up effect. Celebrities have been found to match-up better with products with high psychological and social risks. Further research in the Celebrity Match-Up area has shown that attractive celebrities match-up better with products that are attractiveness related. In addition to the Celebrity Match-Up Hypothesis, a Beauty Match-Up Hypothesis exists. The Beauty Match-Up Hypothesis Solomon, Ashmore and Longo's study (1992) offers the idea that beauty is more complex than just attractiveness versus unattractiveness. The Beauty Match-Up Hypothesis introduces the idea that there are several types of beauty, of these beauty types certain types are more appropriately paired with specific products than others in advertising. The researchers "further propose that perceivers mentally associate exemplars of different types of beauty with distinct personalities and lifestyles." (Solomon et al., 1992, 24) Solomon et al.'s study (1992) used a convenience sample of eighteen major fashion editors based in New York. Two specific elements of the Beauty Match-Up Hypothesis were tested: (1) are there are multiple types of beauty? (2) Are particular products best associated with specific types of good looks? The study used two beauty related products, perfumes and magazines. The perfumes included Opium, Poison, Charlie, Chanel No. 5, and White Linen. The magazines tested included Cosmopolitan, Glamour, Self, Seventeen, and Vogue (Solomon et al., 1992). The survey participants were each given a set of ninety-six photographs of female models and asked to divide them into categories and then name the categories based on the similarity of the models' appearances (Solomon et al., 1992). The results revealed six categories of beauty: Classic Beauty/Feminine (perfect physical features with a soft or romantic look), Sensual/Exotic (sexual and ethnic look), Sex-Kitten (overt sexual and youthful look), Trendy (offbeat look, flawed in contrast to Classic Beauty), Cute (youthful physical features and/or clothing), and Girl-Next-Door (natural and unmade-up look). Each category was then rated for congruence with the set of perfumes and magazines (Solomon et al., 1992). The results of the study (Solomon et al., 1992) supported the idea that there are multiple types of physical attractiveness of models. The final six categories found to exist included (1) Classic Beauty/Feminine, (2) Sensual/Exotic, (3) Sex-Kitten, (4) Trendy, (5) Cute, and (6) Girl-Next-Door. When a comparison of beauty type and product was conducted, the results showed a good match-up for the Sex-Kitten dimension of beauty and Cosmopolitan magazine. Seventeen magazine was closely associated with the Cute dimension of beauty. Chanel perfume showed a strong positive match with Classic Beauty/Feminine, Poison showed a strong negative match with Girl-Next-Door, and White Linen showed a strong positive match with Girl-Next-Door and a clear negative match with Trendy. The results support both elements of the Beauty Match-Up Hypothesis (Solomon et al., 1992). A study done by Englis, Solomon and Ashmore (1994) expands on Solomon et al.'s (1992) study and examines beauty types in two different media; fashion magazine advertisements and contemporary music videos. The researchers hypothesized that there would be a variety of looks portrayed in both print and electronic media, both in advertisements and in program content. The researchers also hypothesized that a uniform distribution of beauty would not be found. Also, particular magazines and specific musical genres were hypothesized to result in different beauty types (Englis et al., 1994). For the magazine portion of the study (Englis et al., 1994), three undergraduate students content analyzed 195 models from advertisements in the fashion magazines Cosmopolitan, Glamour, Mademoiselle, Self, Seventeen, Vogue, Esquire, GQ, and Playboy. Results showed that the six beauty types from Solomon et al.'s (1992) study were not evenly represented across the magazines. The most common looks overall included Trendy, Classic Beauty/Feminine, and Sensual/Exotic. Both the Sensual/Exotic and Trendy beauty types were found most in Glamour and Vogue. The Classic Beauty/Feminine look was most often found in Cosmopolitan, Mademoiselle, and Self (Englis et al., 1994). For the music video portion of the study (Englis et al., 1994), two undergraduate students coded 113 videos using the same procedure as the first study. Results revealed that the overall distribution of beauty types was not evenly represented across musical genre, with the greatest emphasis on the Sensual/Exotic look. The next most common looks were Trendy and Classic Beauty/Feminine. A significant relationship between musical genre and type of beauty was found (Englis et al., 1994). Frith, Shaw and Cheng (2005) used Englis et al.'s (1994) beauty types to examine magazine advertisements from Singapore, Taiwan, and the United States. The researchers narrowed down the beauty types to four: Classic, Sensual/Sex Kitten, Cute/Girl-next-door, and Trendy. Advertisements in popular beauty and fashion magazines containing at least one female model were content analyzed by two coders. It was hypothesized that Caucasian models would be used more in all cultures, the beauty types would differ in all locations, the beauty types of the Caucasian models would differ from the Asian models' beauty types, and the products being advertised would be different. Frith et al. (2005) found that Caucasian models were used most in all three cultures and that the models' beauty types differed among the three cultures. The researchers found that the Sensual/Sex Kitten beauty type was used most in U.S. ads, while the Cute/Girl-next-door beauty type was used most in Taiwanese ads. When examining race, the researchers found that the Sensual/Sex Kitten beauty type was used more often with Caucasian models, and the Cute/Girl-next-door beauty type was used more often with Chinese models. Finally, Frith et al. (2005) discovered that beauty products were advertised more often in Singapore and Taiwan while clothing was advertised frequently in the U.S. Maynard and Taylor (1999) found that models in Japanese magazines had more of a cute look versus the models in the same American magazine. Four Japanese and four American issues of Seventeen magazine were content analyzed to examine the portrayal of the models in the advertisements. The researchers found that American models were associated more with independence, determination, and sometimes defiance. Japanese models portrayed more of a happy, playful, girlish image which can be described as Cute (Maynard and Taylor, 1999). The two studies (Frith et al., 2005 and Maynard and Taylor, 1999) show the difference of model's beauty portrayals across cultures. Beauty Types Huckeba (2005) built on Solomon et al.'s (1992) study to determine if the categories that divided the models beauty types existed among female college students. The researcher hypothesized that the categorization of the models would be consistent with the six categories of beauty from the previous study. Photographs of models from popular fashion magazines such as Vogue, Cosmopolitan, InStyle, and Allure were used in the study. A total of 258 female undergraduates rated fourteen models on how well they fit into each pre-established dimension of beauty (Huckeba, 2005). Results of the study revealed two independent dimensions of beauty exist. The Sex Kitten dimension and Sensual/Exotic dimension were factored together and were renamed Sexual/Sensual. The Girl-Next-Door, Cute, and Classic/Feminine dimensions were factored together and renamed Young Feminine. Additionally, the study measured respondents' emotional responses to each model. Results showed that respondents felt more positively about the models in the Young Feminine category than the Sensual/Sexual models (Huckeba, 2005). See Table 2-1 for examples of the two new beauty dimensions found to exist. The present study tests these two beauty dimensions among unknown models on a female audience to determine if they match-up with products with the same images. In addition to testing a match-up effect, self-concept congruity between the respondents and models is tested. Table 2-1: Strongest, Weakest, and Middle Examples of Beauty Dimensions Sensual/Sexual Young Feminine Strongest f3i A Middle Weakest Self-Concept Sirgy (1982) outlines the term self-concept as someone's complete thoughts and feelings about themselves. Self-concept can be divided into several dimensions including actual-self or real-self, ideal-self, and social-self. Actual-self refers to how people see themselves, ideal-self refers to how people would like to see themselves, and social-self refers to how people present themselves to others (Sirgy, 1982). Zinkhan and Hong (1991) describe the ideal self-concept being the reference point with which the actual self is compared. The real-self and ideal-self are the two main self-concepts that have been frequently studied (Dolich, 1969). It has been found that consumers prefer images that are similar to their own self- concepts (Dolich, 1969; Hong and Zinkhan, 1995; Mehta, 1999). Dolich (1969) conducted a study examining whether consumers tend to accept brands with images similar to their self-concept and reject brands with images dissimilar to their self-concept. Dolich (1969) concluded that respondents' preferred brands were perceived to be more similar to self-concept than least preferred brands. For most preferred brands, the ideal- self and real-self images were generally found to have the same relationships. For least preferred brands, significant differences were found between ideal-self and real-self congruence for all products. Dolich's (1969) results verify that individuals tend to relate brands to their own self-concepts. Products can provide a means of self expression; therefore consumers tend to prefer products with images that are compatible, or congruent with their self-concept. Hong and Zinkhan (1995) conducted a study to determine the importance of self- concept on influencing effectiveness of advertising. The researchers chose the introversion/extroversion dimension of self-concept for the study. It was hypothesized that advertising effectiveness would be enhanced when the ads were congruent with the respondents' self-concepts and ideal self-concepts. Congruent ads were expected to produce a better brand memory, more favorable attitude toward the product, and stronger purchase intent from respondents. Additionally, it was hypothesized that brands with images that are congruent with respondents' ideal self-concepts would be preferred to brands with images congruent with respondents' actual self-concepts. Finally, it was hypothesized that brands consistent with ideal self-concept would reveal greater purchase intent if the discrepancy between the product image and actual self-concept is low or moderate. If the discrepancy between the product image and actual self-concept is high, it was hypothesized that brands consistent with actual-self concept would reveal greater purchase intent. Automobiles and shampoo were used in the study (Hong and Zinkhan, 1995) with blue jeans used as a buffer advertisement. Two ads were prepared for each product category, one in an introverted style and one in an extroverted style. There were two parts to the study, a self-evaluation section and a section to evaluate the advertisements. The evaluation of the ads consisted of memory, brand image, preference, and purchase intention for each brand. Results for the first hypothesis, brand memory would be affected by ads consistent with self-concept, was not supported. However, results for the second and third hypotheses were supported. Brand preference was found to increase when advertising was consistent with respondents' self-concept. In other words, the more a brand is similar to the respondent's self-concept the more they will like the brand. It was also found that purchase intent is stronger when the image of the brand is congruent with the respondent's self-concept (Hong and Zinkhan, 1995). Results of the study conducted by Hong and Zinkhan (1995) concludes that ideal- self congruency versus actual-self congruency has a higher impact on brand preference. The final hypothesis was not supported. It did not matter how low or extreme the discrepancy between self-concept and product image, ideal-self congruency had a greater effect on purchase intent than actual-self congruency. Overall, it was found that brand preference and purchase intent were influenced by self-congruent appeals, while brand memory was not. The researchers concluded that self-congruent advertising appeals should be used when the primary aim of the advertisement is to obtain a higher brand preference or purchase intent. Also, if the primary aim is to increase brand preference and purchase intention, ideal self-concept congruence is better than actual self-concept congruence. A study done by Mehta (1999) explored self-concept and brand image convergence. A commercial for a cosmetic and fragrance company was tested among a general audience of men and women aged 18 and up. Respondents watched a video with a program and the commercial in their own homes. Telephone interviews were conducted the day after to measure recall, idea communications, and purchase intent. There was also a section for the respondents to indicate their self-concepts (Mehta, 1999). Results indicated that the fragrance used in the test advertisement appealed more strongly to the younger respondents. Respondents were divided into three different groups based on their self-reported self-concept. The groups included Adventurous (adventurous, exotic, mysterious), Sensual/Elegant (sensuous, sexy, elegant, sophisticated, stylish), and Sensitive (sensitive, romantic, traditional). The commercial had significantly different reactions among the three groups. On most dimensions, including recall, purchase intent, brand rating, and commercial liking, both the Adventurous and Sensual/Elegant groups exhibited strongly favorable reactions. The Sensitive group had consistently negative responses to the commercial. Even though the younger demographic had positive responses to the commercial, the Adventurous and Sensual/Elegant groups had more positive reactions, indicating that they would be a better target audience (Mehta, 1999). Self-concept and brand-image distance scores were also calculated to determine the level of convergence. The sample was once again divided into three groups (high, medium, and low convergence) based on these calculations. Purchase intent was then compared for all three groups. Results showed that purchase intent is significantly influenced by the convergence levels. Respondents who have a high convergence with the brand, or see the brand as being similar to who they are, are more interested in purchasing the brand. Conversely, respondents who have a low convergence with the brand, or see the brand as different from who they are, are less likely to be interested in purchasing the brand (Mehta, 1999). Mehta (1999) found that self-concept was a good tool for the evaluation of advertisements. Self-concept was used to segment the audience and it was found that the commercial was significantly more effective among respondents whose self-concepts were similar. It is also known that people have a strong tendency to like other people who share similar characteristics such as demographics, culture, personality, attitudes, and beliefs. Based on these ideas, Zinkhan and Hong (1991) hypothesized that advertising effectiveness is enhanced (through memory, attitude towards the product, and purchase intent) when the appeals in the advertisements are congruent with the viewer's actual and ideal self-concept. Therefore, if a model's personality is congruent with the viewer's self-concept, effectiveness of the advertisement could be enhanced. Self-concept research overall has shown that people tend to have more positive attitudes towards things and people that match their self-concept. Need for Present Research A large quantity of research exists focused on the use of endorsers in advertising, beauty types of models in advertisements, the match-up effect, and self-concept. Currently, there is no research that uses congruence to match models in advertising to products and consumers' self-concepts. The current study attempts to use the two beauty dimensions found to exist in a previous study (Huckeba, 2005) and match them with specific products; magazines and perfumes. The sexy and cute dimensions of beauty found in Huckeba's (2005) study need to be further tested among a female audience in order to determine if the audience will respond as expected to the different dimensions of beauty. According to previous research (Huckeba, 2005), it is expected that a female audience will have a more positive reaction to the models with a cute beauty type. The present research will also determine whether or not the two dimensions of beauty match-up to products as expected. Solomon et al. (1992) found a match-up for the Sex-Kitten dimension of beauty and Cosmopolitan magazine as well as a match-up for the Cute dimension of beauty and Seventeen magazine. The current study also attempts to add to that body of research by including a self-concept dimension. As found in previous research (Dolich, 1969; Hong and Zinkhan, 1995; Mehta, 1999), it is expected that consumers prefer images that are similar to their own self-concepts. Rather than testing respondents' self-concepts with the brand being advertised, they will be tested with the model in the advertisement. The focus of the present study is limited to unknown models rather than celebrity spokespersons. Female college students are used in order to better understand a possible target audience for both product categories. The study will offer insight about female college students' reactions to models in advertising. Conclusion Based on the results of a previous study (Huckeba, 2005), it is expected that that a female audience will react more positively to the models with a cute look versus the models with more of a sexy look. Based on previous research (Solomon et al., 1992; Englis et al., 1994) it is also predicted that the models' images (cute or sexy) will match- up to products with similar images which leads to the following hypotheses: H1: A model with a Sensual/Sexual beauty type will match up to a product with a Sensual/Sexual brand image. H2 : A model with a Young Feminine, or cute beauty type will match up to a product with a Young Feminine, or cute brand image. The current study also attempts to answer the following question regarding self- concept congruity: * Is attitude toward a model related to how well the model's perceived personality fits the respondent's self-concept? CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY The primary purpose of this study is to determine if products with certain brand images will match-up with models with the same image using both beauty types found to exist in Huckeba's (2004) study. The study also uses a personality measure to determine if attitude toward a model is related to how well the model fits the respondents' self- concepts. Research Design A survey in the form of a self-administered questionnaire was used to test the hypotheses. The questionnaire was in a pen and paper format and was given to respondents face-to-face. Survey research can be described as "the systematic collection of information (typically via a questionnaire) from respondents in order to better understand and/or predict some aspect of their attitudes or behaviors" (Davis, 1997, 118). A survey was chosen for the present study because surveys are seen as an excellent way to measure the attitudes of large populations, such as students in a classroom (Babbie, 2001). The survey used a self-administered questionnaire in which all respondents were asked the same questions in the same order, so bias of the researcher is reduced (Davis, 1997). Because of their standardized format, questionnaires are also generally strong on reliability since they eliminate possible problems in observations made by the researcher (Babbie, 2001). The fashion models used in the current study were selected based on Huckeba's (2005) research. Four different models from Huckeba's (2005) research were chosen using scores for the sexy and cute dimensions. Models representing the range of scores were chosen ranging from high sexy, high cute to low sexy, low cute. Model A had a high sexy, low cute score, Model B had a high cute, low sexy score, Model C had a low cute, low sexy score, and Model D's had a middle cute, middle sexy score. All models chosen were unknown non-celebrities. To remain consistent with previous research, four products from two categories, magazines and perfumes were used in the study. The products chosen for the study were Seventeen magazine, Cosmopolitan magazine, CK Obsession perfume, and Clinique Happy perfume. Both Cosmopolitan magazine and CK Obsession perfume have a Sensual/Sexual brand image, while both Seventeen magazine and Clinique Happy perfume have a Young Feminine, or cute brand image. Brand Selection Previous studies have used magazines and perfumes for testing the Match-Up Hypothesis (Solomon et al., 1992). The four brands chosen for the current study exhibited the images of both beauty types found to exist in Huckeba's (2005) research. The two products from the magazine category whose images had been previously identified were Seventeen and Cosmopolitan. Seventeen magazine was chosen for the current study because of its Young Feminine, or cute image. In previous research, Solomon et al. (1992) describe the magazine's image as cute and youthful. Cosmopolitan magazine was chosen because of its longstanding image that celebrates female sexual expression. The magazine has been said to help modernize women's thinking about sex and many other lifestyle issues. It has also pushed the envelope at times when the world and American culture were very conservative (Jenkins, 2005). The two products from the perfume category were Clinique Happy and CK Obsession. Clinique Happy was chosen for its Young Feminine, or cute image portrayed by its print advertisements. The Sensual/Sexual nature of the CK Obsession advertisements made it a good choice for the current study. Table 3-1 presents examples of advertisements for both perfumes (Images de Parfums, 2006). Table 3-1: Perfume Advertisements Clinique Happy Ad, 2001 CK Obsession Ad, 1999 -OBSESSION' I: Instrumentation Questions on the survey (which can be found in the appendix) included indicating the respondent's attitude toward all four models and all four products using a five-point semantic differential scale. In order to achieve greater reliability, attitude toward the models and products were tested on three dimensions including Pleasant/Unpleasant, Favorable/Unfavorable, and Good/Bad. Respondents were asked to indicate how well all models fit into both the Sensual/Sexual and Young Feminine, or cute categories using a five-point semantic differential scale. For greater reliability, two dimensions were used to test the models' fit with each category including Girl-next-door Sex-Kitten and Sensual/Exotic Cute. Respondents were also asked to indicate how well each model fit with each product on a five point Likert-type scale ranging from a very bad fit to a very good fit. Respondents were asked to indicate how close each model's personality fit to the respondent's real and ideal self-concepts as well as their undesired self-concepts. Using a five-point Likert-type scale, three separate questions were asked for each model: How close is Model X's personality to who you are (your personality)?, How close is Model X's personality to who you would like to be?, and How close is Model X's personality to who you don't want to be? Demographic questions were also asked. Sample The participants in the current study were a convenience sample taken from classes in the Journalism and Communication department at a large Southeastern University. Participants were recruited from four undergraduate classes: Elements of Advertising (ADV 3000), Advertising Strategy (ADV 3001), Media Planning (ADV 4300) and Public Relations Writing (PUR 4100). A total of 149 females participated in the study and were awarded extra credit points for participating. One version of the questionnaire was given out to all participants by the principal investigator. Instructions were printed at the top of the questionnaire and also read aloud to the participants by the principal investigator. The informed consent document was attached to the front of all questionnaires and was collected and separated upon completion of the questionnaire. Measurement Participants were first asked if they were familiar with each model and each product. Familiarity of each model was measured on a four-point Likert-type scale ranging from (1) not at all familiar to (4) very familiar. Familiarity of each product was measured using a (1) yes or (2) no. The participants were then asked to indicate their attitude toward each model and product on three different five-point semantic differential scales including Good Bad, Favorable Unfavorable, and Pleasant Unpleasant which were all rotated and randomized. Participants were asked to score the models on a five- point semantic differential scale including Girl-next-door Sex-Kitten and Sensual/Exotic Cute which were all rotated and randomized. Participants were then asked to indicate how well they thought each model fit with each product on a Likert- type scale. The scale ranged from (1) very bad fit to (5) very good fit, with the middle level being (3) neutral. Participants were also asked to indicate how they felt about each of the models' personalities. They were first asked if the models' personalities were close to their own self-concepts. Then they were asked if the models' personalities were close to who they wanted to be like. Finally, the participants were asked if the models' personalities were close to who they did not want to be like. Each of these questions used a Likert-type scale ranging from (1) very bad fit to (5) very good fit, while (3) was neutral. Respondents were asked about their job status, and how much money they spent per week on non-necessities such as entertainment and clothing. They were asked to choose from the following amounts: $0-49, $50-99, $100-149, and $150+. Data Processing Respondents marked their answers on scan-tron sheets. The raw data from the answer sheets was uploaded into SPSS and cleaned where needed. Variable names were assigned to the data. Variables including attitude toward the models, attitude towards the brands, models' cute/sexy scores, and models' fit to the products were all recorded. The new values for attitudes toward the models and brands were as follows: 2 = Very Good, - 36 2 = Very Bad, and 0 = Neutral. The Cute/Sexy measures were also recorded so that 2 = Girl-next-door and Cute, and -2 = Sensual/Exotic and Sex-Kitten. The final recode was done for the models' fit to the products so that 2 = Very Good Fit, -2 = Very Bad Fit, and 0 = Neutral. The data was then analyzed using frequencies, manipulation checks, repeated measures analysis of variance, and stepwise multiple regression. A .05 level of significance was used for all analyses. CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Sample Demographics A total of 149 female students participated in the current study. Most respondents were between the ages of 19 and 21 (85.6 valid percent). The majority of respondents describe their race as white, non-Hispanic (74.3 valid percent) followed by Hispanic (12.2 valid percent). The next categories with the highest number of respondents were black, non-Hispanic and Asian/Pacific Islander with 5.4 valid percent each. Over half of the participants (53.7 valid percent) indicated that they did not currently have a job. Of the participants that indicated they were employed, most (44.3 valid percent) worked part-time while the others (2 valid percent) worked full-time. Just under half of the participants (49.4 valid percent) indicated that they spent over $100 per month on personal items which were non-necessities. Manipulation Checks Cute/Sexy Validation A manipulation check using repeated measures analysis of variance was performed to determine if the subjects of this study rated the models in a manner similar to their selection for inclusion in this study. We expected Model A to be high sexy, Model B to be high cute, Model C to be low sexy/cute and Model D to be middle sexy/cute. For the semantic differential scale, "Girl-next-door/Sex-kitten," the means for all models were significantly different from each other (p<.05). Model A was rated the closest to the Sex- kitten dimension with a mean score of-1.624. Model B was rated the closest to the Girl- next-door dimension with a mean score of 1.772. Models C and D were in the middle with mean scores of -.282 and .295, respectively. Table 4-2 shows all models' mean scores. Table 4-1: Sample Description N % Valid % Age 18 4 2.7 2.9 19 34 22.8 24.5 20 52 34.9 37.4 21 33 22.1 23.7 22 13 8.7 9.4 25 2 1.3 1.4 29 1 .7 .7 Total 139 93.3 100.0 Missing 10 6.7 Race White, non- 110 73.8 74.3 Hispanic 18 12.1 12.2 Hispanic 8 5.4 5.4 Black, non- 8 5.4 5.4 Hispanic 4 2.7 2.7 Asian/Pacific Islander Other Total 148 99.3 100.0 Missing 1 .7 Has a Job No 80 53.7 53.7 Yes, part-time 66 44.3 44.3 Yes, full-time 3 2.0 2.0 Total 149 100.0 100.0 Money $0-49 22 14.8 14.9 Spent $50-99 53 35.6 35.8 $100-149 39 26.2 26.4 $150+ 34 22.8 23.0 Total 148 99.3 100.0 Missing__ 1 .7 A second manipulation check was completed using the "Cute/Sensual-Exotic" semantic differential measurement. Mean scores for all models were significantly different from each other (p<.05). Model A was rated the closest to the Sensual-Exotic dimension with a mean score of -1.497. Model B was rated the closest to the Cute dimension with a mean score of 1.698. Models C and D were in the middle with mean scores of -.416 and .154, respectively. Table 4-3 shows the mean scores for all models. Table 4-2: Means for Girl-next-door/Sex-Kitten (2 = Very GND, -2 = Very SK) Model Mean Rank Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound B 1.772 1 .041 1.692 1.852 D .295 2 .085 .126 .464 C -.282 3 .059 -.398 -.166 A -1.624 4 .060 -1.742 -1.506 Mauchly's W=.866, df 5, p=.001, indicated the need to use the Huynh-Feldt estimates for the within-subjects test of significance, F = 438.18, df=2, p = .000. Table 4-3: Means for Cute/Sensual-Exotic (2 = Very C, -2 = Very S/E) Model Mean Rank Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound B 1.698 1 .042 1.614 1.782 D .154 2 .084 -.013 .321 C -.416 3 .056 -.528 -.305 A -1.497 4 .066 -1.627 -1.367 Mauchly's W=.780, df 5, p=.000 indicated the need to use the Huynh-Feldt estimates for the within-subjects test of significance, F = 50.34, df = 3, p = .000. The results of the manipulation checks indicate that Model A was seen as being high sexy and low cute, which fits the Sensual/Sexual beauty type. Model B was seen as being high cute, but low sexy which fits the Young Feminine beauty type. Model C was seen as being low cute and low sexy, while Model D was in the middle of both beauty types. Attitude Toward Models and Products As expected, there were significant differences among attitudes toward the models. Model B (high cute/low sexy) (Mean = 1.018) evoked a significantly more positive attitude than all the other models. Likewise, Model D (middle cute/middle sexy) (Mean = .622) had an attitude score more positive than all the other models except Model B. Model A and C were significantly different from each other and had lower attitude scores than Model B and D. The more cute models were viewed more favorably than were the less cute models. Means for all models are presented in table 4-4. Table 4-4: Attitudes toward the Models (2 = favorable and -2 = unfavorable) Attitude toward the Model Mean Rank Std. 95% Confidence Error Interval Lower Upper Bound Bound Model B (high cute/low sexy) 1.018 1 .062 .895 1.141 Model D (middle-cute/middle .622 2 .067 .489 .755 sexy) Model A (high sexy/low cute) .013 3 .069 -.123 .149 Model C (low cute/low sexy) -.260 4 .062 -.382 -.137 Grand Mean .348 .038 .274 .423 Repeated Measures ANOVA showed significant differences among means, df= 3, F = 89.194, p = .000 'Attitude toward Model B was significantly greater than all others 2Attitude toward Model D was significantly less than Model B and greater than all others 3Model A was significantly less than Model B and D and greater than Model C 4Model C was significantly less than all others Also, as expected, there were significant differences among attitudes toward the four products. Subjects were significantly more favorable toward Cosmopolitan (Mean = .984) than all the other products. Similarly, Clinique Happy (Mean = .782) had the second most favorable attitude, significantly less than Cosmopolitan and significantly more positive than Seventeen (Mean = .568) and CK Obsession (Mean = .191). Seventeen's attitude was significantly more positive than CK Obsession. Means for all products are presented in Table 4-5. Table 4-5: Attitudes toward the Products (2 = favorable and -2 =unfavorable) Std. 95% Confidence Interval Attitude toward the Product Mean Rank Confidene Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Cosmopolitan .9841 1 .083 .820 1.147 Clinique Happy .7822 2 .081 .622 .941 Seventeen .5683 3 .070 .430 .706 CK Obsession .1914 4 .065 .061 .320 Grand Mean .631 .048 .537 .725 Because Mauchly's W (.918) was significant (df = 5, p = .033), the Huynh-Feldt Repeated Measures ANOVA was used. It revealed significant differences (df = 2.826, F = 25.688, p = .000). 'Cosmopolitan was significantly greater than all others 2Clinique was significantly less than Cosmopolitan and greater than all others 3Seventeen was significantly less than Cosmopolitan and Clinique and greater than CK Obsession. 4CK Obsession was significantly less than all others Models' Fit with Beauty Types: Hypothesis Testing Hypothesis 1: A model with a Sensual/Sexual beauty type will match up to a product with a Sensual/Sexual brand image. All models were compared to both products with sexy images, Cosmopolitan magazine and CK Obsession perfume using a repeated measures analysis of variance (Table 4-6) of ratings from the Very Bad Fit to Very Good Fit scale (1 = Very Bad Fit). The model with the best fit score for Cosmopolitan was the model with the high sexy/low cute beauty type (Model A) with a mean of .933. The model with the middle cute/middle sexy beauty type, model D, had the second best fit (Mean = .577). Model C (low cute/low sexy) came in next with a mean of .289, followed by the high cute/low sexy model (Model B) with a mean of -.530. Results indicated that the high sexy/low cute model and the middle cute/middle sexy model had the best fit with Cosmopolitan, with the high sexy/low cute model having the best fit. The high cute/low sexy model had the worst match-up with Cosmopolitan. The results supported the hypothesis. Table 4-6: Means for Cosmopolitan Match-Up (2 = Very Good Fit, -2 = Very Bad Fit) Std 95% Confidence Interval Model Mean Rank ' Error Lower Bound Upper Bound A .933 1 .089 .758 1.108 D .577 2 .085 .409 .746 C .289 3 .098 .095 .433 B -.530 4 .089 -.706 -.354 Mauchly's W=.856, df 5, p=.000 indicated the need to use the Huynh-Feldt estimates for the within-subjects test of significance, F = 49.47, df = 2.823, p = .000. A repeated measures analysis of variance was also used to test the second sexy product, CK Obsession perfume (Table 4-7). The model with the high sexy/low cute beauty type, Model A, had the highest mean score for CK Obsession (1.020), and the score was significantly greater than all others. The model with the low cute/low sexy beauty type, model C, had the next highest mean (.510) for CK Obsession perfume. This model had significantly less fit than Model A and significantly more fit than Model D and B. Model D (middle cute/middle sexy) had the next highest mean of. 148, followed by the high cute/low sexy model (Model B) with a mean of -1.134. The best fit for CK Obsession was the high sexy/low cute model (Model A) and the worst fit was the high cute/low sexy model (Model B), which supports the hypothesis. Table 4-7 presents mean scores which were all significantly different for all models. Table 4-7: Means for CK Obsession Match-Up (2 = Very Good Fit, -2 = Very Bad Fit) Std. 95% Confidence Interval Model Mean Rank ' Error Lower Bound Upper Bound A 1.020 1 .093 .837 1.203 C .510 2 .102 .309 .712 D .148 3 .095 -.040 .335 B 4 .074 -1.281 -.988 1.134 Mauchly's W=.856, df 5, p=.000, indicated the need to use the Huynh-Feldt estimates for the within-subjects test of significance, F = 49.47, df= 2.814, p = .000. Hypothesis 2: A model with a Young Feminine, or cute beauty type will match up to a product with a Young Feminine, or cute brand image. All models were compared to the two cute products, Seventeen (Table 4-8) and Clinique (Table 4-9) with a repeated measures analysis of variance. Models B (high cute/low sexy) and D (middle cute/middle sexy) were rated as the best fits with Model B (Mean = 1.764) having a significantly higher fit score than Model D (Mean = 1.257). The low cute/low sexy model (Model C) and the high sexy/low cute model (Model A) had the lowest fit scores with mean scores that were significantly different from each other and from models B and D. The low cute/low sexy model's (Model C) mean score was -.696 while the high sexy/low cute model's (Model A) mean score was -1.514. While both the high cute/low sexy and middle cute/middle sexy models fit with the cute product, results show that the high cute/low sexy model best fit Seventeen magazine. The hypothesis was supported. Table 4-8: Means for Seventeen Match-Up (2 = Very Good Fit, -2 = Very Bad Fit) Std. 95% Confidence Interval Model Mean Rank ' Error Lower Bound Upper Bound B 1.764 1 .055 1.692 1.852 D 1.257 2 .077 1.105 1.408 C -.696 3 .098 -.890 -.502 A 4 .073 -1.657 -1.370 1.514 Mauchly's W=.856, df 5, p=.000, indicated the need to use the Huynh-Feldt estimates for the within-subjects test of significance, F= 49.47, df = 2.811, p= .000. The second cute product to be tested with a repeated measures analysis of variance was Clinique Happy perfume (Table 4-9). The models with the best fit to Clinique Happy were the high cute/low sexy model (Model B) and the middle cute/middle sexy model (Model D). Model B's mean score (Mean = 1.228) was significantly higher than Model D's mean score (Mean = .725). The low cute/low sexy model (Model C) and the high sexy/low cute model (Model A) had the lowest fit scores at -1.195 and -1.242, respectively. The low cute/low sexy model (Model C) and the high sexy/low cute model (Model A) had mean scores that were not significantly different from each other, but were significantly lower than both the middle cute/middle sexy model (Model D) and high cute/low sexy model's (Model B) scores. Results show that the cute models better fit the cute product with the cutest model having the best fit. The hypothesis was supported. Table 4-9: Means for Clinique Happy Match-Up 2 = Very Good Fit, -2 = Very Bad Fit) Std. 95% Confidence Interval Model Mean Rank ' Error Lower Bound Upper Bound B 1.228 1 .083 1.065 1.391 D .725 2 .083 .561 .889 C 3 .077 -1.347 -1.042 A 195 4 .084 -1.407 -1.076 1.242 Mauchly's W=.856, df 5, p=.000, indicated the need to use the Huynh-Feldt estimates for the within-subjects test of significance, F = 49.47, df = 2.789, p = .000 Relationship Between Fit and Attitude Toward the Model Respondents' perceptions of how well the models fit the different products, the dependent variable, were related to respondents' attitudes toward the products, the independent variable. Fit for the cute products (Seventeen and Clinique Happy) was related to respondents' attitudes toward the cute models (Model B: high cute/low sexy and Model D: middle cute/middle sexy). As expected, fit of the cute models to sexy products was not related to respondents' attitude toward the products. The fit of sexy products to attitudes toward the models was correlated for Cosmopolitan but not CK Obsession. The fit of the low sexy/low cute model was, as might be expected, more diverse. Fit of this model to Seventeen, Clinique Happy and Cosmopolitan was related to respondents' attitudes toward the model. Because of the model's low cute/low sexy rating, she was not perceived to be an extreme (high cute/low sexy or high sexy/low cute) giving her correlations for fit scores and attitude across cute and sexy products. These results suggested that the fit of a model to a product is related to the models cute/sexy rating as well as individuals' like-dislike (attitude) of the model. Models that fit a product are likely to generate favorable attitudes. Table 4-10: Fit and Attitude Toward Model Relationship Attitude toward the Model Fit of Model Image to Product Cute Products Sexy Products Seventeen Clinique Cosmopolitan CK Happy Obsession R sig. R sig. R sig. R sig. B (high cute/low sexy) .048 ns .212 .009 .082 ns .138 ns D (middle cute/middle sexy) .256 .002 .341 .000 .096 ns -.159 ns A (high sexy/low cute) .037 ns -.069 ns .226 .005 .135 ns C (low sexy/low cute) .208 .011 .204 .013 .317 .000 .053 ns Research Question: Is attitude toward a model related to how well the model's perceived personality fits the respondent's self-concept? To address this question, stepwise multiple regression was used with attitude toward the model as the dependent variable and the three measures of personality fit as the independent variables. These three personality fit measures were (1) How close is the model's personality to who you are? (2) How close is the model's personality to who you would like to be? and (3) How close is the model's personality to who you don't want to be? Measurement was with a 1 to 5 scale, 1 = Very Close and 5 = Very Far. There are two reminders for reading these results. First, the independent measures are highly correlated causing the models to be affected by multicollinearity as reported. This limits examining beta weights to identify which independent variable explained more variance. This was not the purpose of this analysis. The purpose of this analysis was simply to explore which personality fits were significant. Second, because the attitude measure was scaled in the opposite direction (2= Very favorable and -2 = Very unfavorable), and one of the measures (Who you do not want to be like) is scaled in the same direction, negative standardized Beta weights reflect the following relationship for the Who You Are and Who You Want to Be measures: as closeness to a model increases, attitude becomes more favorable. For the Who You Do Not Want to Be measure, a negative standardized Beta suggests the following relationship: the closer a model is to "who the respondent does not want to be," the more negative the attitude. Attitudes toward the high sexy/low cute model (Model A, Table 4-11) the middle cute/middle sexy model (Model D, Table 4-12) and the low cute/low sexy model (Model C, Table 4-13) were similar. Both were related to whom the respondents are now and who they do not want to be like: the further the sexy model was from who the subjects are now, the more favorable the attitude. Attitude toward the high sexy/low cute model was also related to who they do not want to be like: the closer the sexy model was to who the subjects did not want to be like, the more positive the attitude. This suggested that the attitudes toward the high sexy/low cute model (Model A), the middle cute/middle sexy (Model D) and the low cute/low sexy model (Model C) were more of avoidance, than aspiration. They did not want to be different from whom they are now and they wanted to be different from the person they did not want to be like. Table 4-11: Attitude and Personality Fit Regression for Model A Independent Variables: Close to... Std. Beta t Sig. Collinearity Statistics Tolerance VIF Who you are -.284 -3.348 .001 .865 1.156 Who you want to be ns ns Ns ns ns Who you do not want to be .173 2.095 .038 .865 1.156 R =.382, R'= .146, df = 2, F = 12.424, p = .000 Table 4-12: Attitude and Personality Fit Regression for Model D Independent Variables: Close to... Std. Beta t Sig. Collinearity Statistics Tolerance VIF Who you are -.233 -2.835 .005 .799 1.251 Who you want to be ns ns Ns ns ns Who you do not want to be .387 4.911 .000 .799 .1251 R =.526, R2= .277, df = 2, F = 27.914, p = .000 The results for Model B (high cute /low sexy) (Table 4-14) were the opposite of the avoidance results found for Model A, Model C and Model D. Who respondents "want to be" was the only significant predictor for the high cute/low sexy model. This suggested the aspirational role for Model B and reinforced the avoidance role for Model A, Model C and Model D. Table 4-13: Attitude and Personality Fit Regression for Model C Independent Variables: Close to... Std. Beta T Sig. Collinearity Statistics Tolerance VIF Who you are -.233 -2.835 .005 .813 1.229 Who you want to be ns ns Ns ns ns Who you do not want to be .266 2.624 .010 .813 1.229 R =.345, R2= .119, df = 2, F = 9.985, p = .000 Table 4-14: Attitude and Personality Fit Regression for Model B Independent Variables: Close Std. Beta t Sig. Collinearity Statistics to... Tolerance VIF Who you are ns ns Ns ns ns Who you want to be -.221 -2.750 .007 1.000 1.000 Who you do not want to be ns ns Ns ns ns R =.221, R2= .049, df = 1, F = 7.565, p =.007 These results suggest that high cute/low sexy models that provide an aspirational image and personality are likely to be more accepted by an audience. Conversely, high sexy/low cute, middle cute/middle sexy and low cute/low sexy models will be more accepted when they provide exemplars of whom viewers want to avoid becoming. Personality Fit and Product Fit To determine the relationship between personality fit and product fit, stepwise multiple regression was used with fit of the product as the dependent variable and (1) close to who you are, (2) close to who you want to be and (3) close to who you do not want to be as independent variables. Sixteen analyses were completed: one for each product for each of the four models. As in the previous regression discussion, please remember that the personality fit measures are highly correlated. Likewise, since the fit measure was anchored 1 = Very Bad and 5 = Very good, and the closeness measure was anchored 1 = Very close and 5 = Very Far, negative standardized Beta weights reflect the proper relationship: as the more close the model to whom the person is or wants to be the better fit of the model to the product. In terms of whom the subjects did not want to be, a positive Beta suggests that fit increases as the model gets closer to whom the subjects do not want to be. For simplicity purposes, the results of the sixteen multiple regressions are presented in one table. The results of only significant regressions are reported. All had p values less than .05. These results provide insight into how models fit with various products. First, subject-model personality fit is not related to model-product fit in all cases (Table 4-15). In general, the results of the multiple regressions show that proximity to a model's personality is most often related to a magazine (Seventeen or Cosmopolitan), and that proximity of a model's personality to "who the subject is" is the significant predictor. This suggests a support function. The model fits the product when the model fits with whom someone perceives themselves to be. Table 4-15: Personality and Product Fits Model A fit with... Who You Are Who You Want Who You Do Not (low cute/high sexy) to Be Want to Be Std. Beta Sig. Std. Sig. Std. Beta Sig. Beta Seventeen -.164 .046 ns Ns ns ns Cosmopolitan ns ns ns Ns .217 .008 CK Obsession ns ns ns Ns .219 .007 Clinique Happy ns ns ns Ns ns ns Model D fit with... Who You Are Who You Want Who You Do Not (middle cute/middle to Be Want to Be sexy) Std. Beta Sig. Std. Sig. Std. Beta Sig. Beta Seventeen ns ns ns Ns ns ns Cosmopolitan -.161 .049 ns Ns ns ns CK Obsession ns ns ns Ns ns ns Clinique Happy ns ns ns Ns .429 .000 Model C fit with... Who You Are Who You Want Who You Do Not (low cute/middle sexy) to Be Want to Be Std. Beta Sig. Std. Sig. Std. Beta Sig. Beta Seventeen ns ns ns Ns ns ns Cosmopolitan -.161 .049 ns Ns ns ns CK Obsession ns ns ns Ns ns ns Clinique Happy ns ns ns Ns .429 .000 Model B fit with... Who You Are Who You Want Who You Do Not (high cute/low sexy) to Be Want to Be Std. Beta Sig. Std. Sig. Std. Beta Sig. Beta Seventeen ns ns ns Ns ns Ns Cosmopolitan -.288 .000 ns Ns ns Ns CK Obsession ns ns -.192 .019 ns Ns Clinique Happy ns ns ns Ns ns Ns CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summary of Results After completing manipulation checks, it was clear that all four models in the study had a different beauty type. Model A was seen as high sexy/low cute, Model B was high cute/low sexy, Model C was low cute and low sexy, while Model D was middle cute and middle sexy. A repeated measures analysis of variance was performed to find the respondents' attitudes toward both the models and the products. The high cute/low sexy model (Model B) was significantly more favorable than all other models. Overall the respondents indicated more favorable attitudes toward the cute models. For the products, Cosmopolitan was the most favorable followed by Clinique Happy, Seventeen, and CK Obsession. Hypothesis One HI: A model with a Sensual/Sexual beauty type will match up to a product with a Sensual/Sexual brand image. In order to find the best model/product fit, a repeated measures analysis of variance was performed. The model with the best fit to the first sexy product, Cosmopolitan, was the high sexy/low cute model (Model A). The high cute/low sexy model (Model B) had the worst fit to the first sexy product. The high sexy/low cute model (Model A) also had the best fit with the second sexy product, CK Obsession. Once again, the worst fit for CK Obsession was the high cute/low sexy model (Model B). These results supported hypothesis one. Hypothesis Two H2: A model with a Young Feminine beauty type will match up to a product with a Young Feminine brand image. A repeated measures analysis of variance was used to test the fit between the models and products. Both the high cute/low sexy model (Model B) and the middle cute/middle sexy model (Model D) fit the first cute product, Seventeen. However, the high cute/low sexy model (Model B) had the best fit, and the high sexy/low cute model (Model A) had the worst fit. The second cute product tested was Clinique Happy. Once again the high cute/low sexy model (Model B) and the middle cute/middle sexy model (Model D) fit the cute product the best, with Model B having the best fit. Model A (high sexy/low cute) had the worst fit with Clinique Happy. The results supported hypothesis two. Research Question * Is attitude toward a model related to how well the model's perceived personality fits the respondent's self-concept? Stepwise multiple regression was used to explore personality fits with respondents and models. Models A (high sexy/low cute), D (middle cute/middle sexy), and C (low cute/low sexy) were found to have more of an avoidance role. Results for the high cute/low sexy model (Model B) were opposite from Models A, C, and D with more of an aspirational role. Therefore, the high cute/low sexy model is more likely to be accepted by an audience. Stepwise multiple regression was used to determine the relationship between personality fit and product fit. Results indicated that a model fits the product when the model fits someone's image of themselves. This fit was found mostly with a magazine as the product. Results indicated that the respondents preferred the high cute, low sexy model (Model B) and the magazine with the sexy image, Cosmopolitan. This could be because the respondents did not view the other magazine, Seventeen, as being targeted toward their age group even though it has a cute image which matched that of the preferred model. This is an area where further research could be conducted. Conclusion Results of the current study show that college-aged women aspired to be like the model with a cute beauty image rather than the models with a more sexy beauty image, which supports previous research (Huckeba, 2005). The results are in support of Huckeba's (2005) findings of two distinct dimensions of beauty among females. If companies want viewers of their ads to aspire to be like the models in them, the models used in the ads should have a cute look. On the other hand, if the goal of the advertisement is avoidance, a model with a sexier look would be more effective. Both the Sexy and Cute models fit with products with similar images. This knowledge is useful to companies because it indicates that products with a sexy image are better paired with sexy models and products with a cute image are better paired with cute models. Models with a sexy image would be best paired with sexy products such as the ones used in the present research (Cosmopolitan and CK Obsession). On the other hand models with more of a cute image would best paired with cute products (such as Seventeen and Clinique Happy). The results of the current study support previous research regarding the Beauty Match-Up Hypothesis (Solomon et al., 1992; Englis et al., 1994). Finally, the models fit the product more often when the model's personality fit that of the respondent. This information indicates that it is necessary to determine the target audience's self-image. The target audience's self-image is an important determining factor as far as which models to choose for certain products. The choice of model should match either the ideal self-image or the actual self-image of the target audience. When there is a match with the model's and audience's self-images, the audience is more likely to think that the model fits the product. The results support the idea that people prefer images that are congruent with their own self-concepts (Dolich, 1969; Hong and Zinkhan, 1995; Mehta, 1999). The findings of the present study indicate that beauty has two distinct dimensions, cute and sexy. These two dimensions are best paired with products with similar images. In order to select a model for an advertisement it is important to determine the model's beauty type and the product's image so that a match can be formed. Limitations Although there were many significant findings, the study had some limitations. The validity of the study may be questioned because the respondents consisted of a convenience sample of students rather than a random sample which means the results should not be generalized beyond the sample. The study was restricted by place and time because the sample of students was taken from classes in the same university. Because participants were students, the study was limited to an age range of 18 to 29. Another limitation was the survey itself. Some of the respondents chose not to answer all of the questions, which might have caused non-response error. Questions regarding familiarity of the products were scored on a yes or no scale. Using a Likert-type scale such as the one used for model familiarity could have elicited different responses. The pictures of the models used in the questionnaire were another limitation. The pictures chosen from Huckeba's (2005) study were not uniform and could possibly have introduced some bias. Some pictures were close-up shots of the model's face while others showed the model's upper torso and clothing. Implications for Advertisers The results of the study provide more information on the beliefs of college-aged women. The information could be useful to brands (such as magazines and perfumes) that target this demographic by providing a basis of spokes model selection. The research supports the importance of choosing the right spokes model for their advertisements. Results of the study show that models with a certain image (sexy or cute) are best paired with products with the same image. Previous research has identified that particular products are best associated with specific types of good looks. The present study supports the previous research done with the Beauty Match-Up Hypothesis. Previous research has also suggested that product and model congruency is necessary. When this occurs, the model's presence is necessary to communicate the desired message. In order to communicate the desired message advertisers should make sure the model's image matches that of the product. Previous research using college-aged women has shown that these women desire to be more like the models with a cute beauty image rather than the sexy models and would purchase products they endorse more willingly. The present study confirms that college- aged women prefer the model with a cute beauty image and aspire to be like her. The present study supports the previous research. Future Research Future research should test the match-up effects of the different beauty types with a greater variety of products that target college-aged women. Future research should also determine if there are different types of good looks for male models. Additionally, future research should test the match-up effect of male models and certain products. Future research should also test the match-up effect for both female and male models using males as the respondents. Also, future research should use a sample that is not limited by age and education. An experimental design could be used to investigate the match-up effect. An experiment would be conducted to determine whether or not a model/product match-up has an effect on recall of the product, attitude toward the advertisement, or product purchase intent. Another area for future research is college-aged women's preference for models with a cute image as well as Cosmopolitan (a magazine with a sexy image) which have contradicting images. Finally, rather than using a convenience sample, a random sample should be used. APPENDIX QUESTIONNAIRE Informed Consent Protocol Title: Beauty Types in Advertisements Please read this document carefully before you decide to participate in this study. Purpose of the research study: The purpose of this study is to examine different types of models' beauty in relation to advertising different types of products. What you will be asked to do in the study: You will be asked to rate different models' beauty types, answer questions regarding personality, and answer questions about different brands. Risks and Benefits: There are no risks or benefits associated with taking part in this study. Compensation: There will be no monetary compensation for taking part in this study. Extra credit will be offered. The number of extra credit points allocated will be at the discretion of your instructor, points will not exceed 3% of your grade. Confidentiality: Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. The study will be completely anonymous. Voluntary participation: Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating. You do not have to answer any question you do not wish to answer. Right to withdraw from the study: You have the right to withdraw from the study at any time without consequence. Whom to contact if you have any questions about the study: Danae Barulich, Graduate Student, danaeb@ufl.edu, (407) 493-0889 Whom to contact about your rights as a research participant in the study: UFIRB Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250; ph 392- 0443 Agreement: I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily agree to participate in the procedure and I have received a copy of this description. Participant: Date: Principal Investigator: Date: 58 Directions: Please read all of the instructions and answer ALL questions using the answer sheet provided. Please do not fill out your Name, UF ID, or Section. > MIMPORTANT: Please bubble in your age on the answer sheet under the SPECIAL CODES section. Use the top row to indicate the first digit in your age, and the bottom row to indicate the second digit in your age. (For example, if you are 20, bubble in 2 in the top row and 0 in the bottom row.) How familiar are you with the model pictured below? Please bubble in the corresponding letter on your answer sheet. 1. (A) Not at all familiar (B) Somewhat familiar (C) Familiar (D) Very familiar Please indicate your attitude toward Model A using the scales below. Bubble in one number from each pair of words. (The closer the number is to one end of the scale, the more the word on that end of the scale describes how you feel toward Model A.) 2. Good 1 2 3 4 5 Bad 3. Unfavorable 1 2 3 4 5 Favorable 4. Pleasant 1 2 3 4 5 Unpleasant 59 How familiar are you with the model pictured below? Please bubble in the corresponding letter on your answer sheet. 5. (A) Not at all familiar (B) Somewhat familiar (C) Familiar (D) Very familiar Please indicate your attitude toward Model B using the scales below. Bubble in one number from each pair of words. (The closer the number is to one end of the scale, the more the word on that end of the scale describes how you feel toward Model B.) 6. Unpleasant 1 7. Unfavorable 1 8. Good 2 3 4 5 Pleasant 2 3 4 5 Favorable 1 2 3 4 5 Bad How familiar are you with the model pictured below? Please bubble in the corresponding letter on your answer sheet. Model C 9. (A) Not at all familiar (B) Somewhat familiar (C) Familiar (D) Very familiar Please indicate your attitude toward Model C using the scales below. Bubble in one number from each pair of words. (The closer the number is to one end of the scale, the more the word on that end of the scale describes how you feel toward Model C.) 10. Favorable 1 11. Unpleasant 1 2 3 4 5 Unfavorable 2 3 4 5 Pleasant 1 2 3 4 5 Good 12. Bad How familiar are you with the model pictured below? Please bubble in the corresponding letter on your answer sheet. 13. (A) Not at all familiar (B) Somewhat familiar (C) Familiar (D) Very familiar Please indicate your attitude toward Model D using the scales below. Bubble in one number from each pair of words. (The closer the number is to one end of the scale, the more the word on that end of the scale describes how you feel toward Model D.) 14. Pleasant 15. Favorable 16. Good 1 2 3 4 5 Unpleasant 1 2 3 4 5 Unfavorable 1 2 3 4 5 Bad 17. Are you familiar with Seventeen magazine? (A) Yes (B) No Please indicate your attitude toward Seventeen magazine using the scales below. Bubble in one number from each pair of words. (The closer the number is to one end of the scale, the more the word on that end of the scale describes how you feel toward Seventeen magazine.) 18. Unfavorable 19. Pleasant 20. Bad 1 2 3 4 5 Favorable 1 2 3 4 5 Unpleasant 1 2 3 4 5 Good 21. Are you familiar with Cosmopolitan magazine? (A) Yes (B) No Please indicate your attitude toward Cosmopolitan magazine using the scales below. Bubble in one number from each pair of words. (The closer the number is to one end of the scale, the more the word on that end of the scale describes how you feel toward Cosmopolitan magazine.) 22. Unfavorable 23. Pleasant 24. Good 1 2 3 4 5 Favorable 1 2 3 4 5 Unpleasant 1 2 3 4 5 Bad 25. Are you familiar with CK Obsession perfume? Please indicate your attitude toward CK Obsession using the scales below. Bubble in one number from each pair of words. (The closer the number is to one end of the scale, the more the word on that end of the scale describes how you feel toward CK Obsession.) 26. Unpleasant 27. Unfavorable 28. Bad 1 2 3 4 5 Pleasant 1 2 3 4 5 Favorable 1 2 3 4 5 Good 29. Are you familiar with Clinique Happy perfume? (A) Yes (B) No Please indicate your attitude toward Clinique Happy using the scales below. Bubble in one number from each pair of words. (The closer the number is to one end of the scale, the more the word on that end of the scale describes how you feel toward Clinique Happy.) 30. Unfavorable 31. Good 32. Unpleasant 1 2 3 4 5 Favorable 1 2 3 4 5 Bad 1 2 3 4 5 Pleasant For each scale shown below decide where, in your opinion, each model falls on each of the two adjective pairs. Bubble in one number from each pair for each model. (The closer the number is to one end of the scale, the more the word on that end of the scale describes the model.) Model A 33. Girl-next-door 34. Sensual/Exotic Sex-Kitten Cute -. Model B 35. Cute 36. Girl-next-door 2 3 4 2 3 4 Sensual/Exotic Sex-Kitten (A) Yes (B) No 37. Sex-Kitten 38. Cute Girl-next-door Sensual/Exotic Model D 39. Sex-Kitten 40. Sensual/Exotic 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 Girl-next-door 5 Cute For each pair of words below, choose the one of the pairs that best describes your ideal. Please answer all questions, choosing either A or B. 41. (A) Logical (B) Emotional 42. (A) Creative, theoretical (B) Practical, functional 43. (A) Rational, reasonable (B) Passionate, perceptive 44. (A) Soft-hearted (B) Firm 45. (A) Sociable (B) Shy 46. (A) Conservative (B) Unconventional 47. (A) Adaptable (B) Deliberate 48. (A) Sensible, factual (B) Instinctual 49. (A) Dependable (B) Changeable 50. (A) Moderate (B) Dynamic 51. (A) Decided (B) Flexible 52. (A) Clear-cut, definite (B) Undecided, variable 53. (A) Idealistic, visionary (B) Realistic, down-to-earth 54. (A) Excitable (B) Stoic 55. (A) Innovative (B) Steadfast 56. (A) Sympathetic (B) Indifferent 57. (A) Assertive (B) Mild 58. (A) Energetic (B) Calm 59. (A) Cold (B) Warm 60. (A) Quiet (B) Outspoken 61. (A) Reserved (B) Active 62. (A) Systematic (B) Imaginative 63. (A) Indistinct (B) Well-defined 64. (A) Wide-interests (B) Precise For each pair of words below, choose the one that you think best describes Model A. Please answer all questions, choosing either A or B. Model A 65. (A) Clear-cut, definite 66. (A) Moderate 67. (A) Quiet 68. (A) Wide-interests 69. (A) Excitable 70. (A) Reserved 71. (A) Sensible, factual 72. (A) Creative, theoretical 73. (A) Innovative 74. (A) Systematic 75. (A) Idealistic, visionary 76. (A) Indistinct 77. (A) Energetic 78. (A) Cold 79. (A) Sympathetic 80. (A) Soft-hearted 81. (A) Logical 82. (A) Rational, reasonable 83. (A) Decided 84. (A) Dependable 85. (A) Adaptable 86. (A) Assertive 87. (A) Conservative 88. (A) Sociable (B) Undecided, variable (B) Dynamic (B) Outspoken (B) Precise (B) Stoic (B) Active (B) Instinctual (B) Practical, functional (B) Steadfast (B) Imaginative (B) Realistic, down-to-earth (B) Well-defined (B) Calm (B) Warm (B) Indifferent (B) Firm (B) Emotional (B) Passionate, perceptive (B) Flexible (B) Changeable (B) Deliberate (B) Mild (B) Unconventional (B) Shy 89. How close is Model A's personality to who you are (your personality)? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far 90. How close is Model A's personality to who you would like to be? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far 91. How close is Model A's personality to who you don't want to be? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far For each pair of words below, choose the one that you think best describes Model B. Please answer all questions, choosing either A or B. S. Model B 92. (A) Excitable 93. (A) Rational, reasonable 94. (A) Idealistic, visionary 95. (A) Adaptable 96. (A) Energetic 97. (A) Moderate 98. (A) Cold 99. (A) Sociable 100. (A) Clear-cut, definite 101. (A) Wide-interests 102. (A) Decided 103. (A) Soft-hearted 104. (A) Assertive 105. (A) Quiet 106. (A) Logical 107. (A) Sympathetic 108. (A) Conservative 109. (A) Systematic 110. (A) Creative, theoretical 111. (A) Sensible, factual 112. (A) Indistinct 113. (A) Innovative 114. (A) Dependable 115. (A) Reserved (B) Stoic (B) Passionate, perceptive (B) Realistic, down-to-earth (B) Deliberate (B) Calm (B) Dynamic (B) Warm (B) Shy (B) Undecided, variable (B) Precise (B) Flexible (B) Firm (B) Mild (B) Outspoken (B) Emotional (B) Indifferent (B) Unconventional (B) Imaginative (B) Practical, functional (B) Instinctual (B) Well-defined (B) Steadfast (B) Changeable (B) Active 116. How close is Model B's personality to who you are (your personality)? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far 117. How close is Model B's personality to who you would like to be? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far 118. How close is Model B's personality to who you don't want to be? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far For each pair of words below, choose the one that you think best describes Model C. Please answer all questions, choosing either A or B. 119. (A) Excitable 120. (A) Conservative 121. (A) Sympathetic 122. (A) Clear-cut, definite 123. (A) Quiet 124. (A) Logical 125. (A) Soft-hearted 126. (A) Wide-interests 127. (A) Systematic 128. (A) Reserved 129. (A) Adaptable 130. (A) Sensible, factual 131. (A) Decided 132. (A) Energetic 133. (A) Moderate 134. (A) Dependable 135. (A) Rational, reasonable 136. (A) Assertive 137. (A) Creative, theoretical 138. (A) Sociable 139. (A) Indistinct 140. (A) Cold 141. (A) Idealistic, visionary 142. (A) Innovative (B) Stoic (B) Unconventional (B) Indifferent (B) Undecided, variable (B) Outspoken (B) Emotional (B) Firm (B) Precise (B) Imaginative (B) Active (B) Deliberate (B) Instinctual (B) Flexible (B) Calm (B) Dynamic (B) Changeable (B) Passionate, perceptive (B) Mild (B) Practical, functional (B) Shy (B) Well-defined (B) Warm (B) Realistic, down-to-earth (B) Steadfast 143. How close is Model C's personality to who you are (your personality)? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far 144. How close is Model C's personality to who you would like to be? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far 145. How close is Model C's personality to who you don't want to be? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far For each pair of words below, choose the one that you think best describes Model D. Please answer all questions, choosing either A or B. SModelD 146. (A) Innovative 147. (A) Indistinct 148. (A) Wide-interests 149. (A) Systematic 150. (A) Soft-hearted 151. (A) Rational, reasonable 152. (A) Assertive 153. (A) Energetic 154. (A) Creative, theoretical 155. (A) Moderate 156. (A) Quiet 157. (A) Excitable 158. (A) Conservative 159. (A) Reserved 160. (A) Logical 161. (A) Idealistic, visionary 162. (A) Sociable 163. (A) Sympathetic 164. (A) Dependable 165. (A) Clear-cut, definite 166. (A) Decided 167. (A) Cold 168. (A) Sensible, factual 169. (A) Adaptable (B) Steadfast (B) Well-defined (B) Precise (B) Imaginative (B) Firm (B) Passionate, perceptive (B) Mild (B) Calm (B) Practical, functional (B) Dynamic (B) Outspoken (B) Stoic (B) Unconventional (B) Active (B) Emotional (B) Realistic, down-to-earth (B) Shy (B) Indifferent (B) Changeable (B) Undecided, variable (B) Flexible (B) Warm (B) Instinctual (B) Deliberate 170. How close is Model D's personality to who you are (your personality)? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far 171. How close is Model D's personality to who you would like to be? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far 172. How close is Model D's personality to who you don't want to be? (A) Very Close (B) Close (C) Neither (D) Far (E) Very Far 68 For each model, indicate whether or not you think she fits the image of each brand listed. Use a 1 5 scale, 1 being a very bad fit, 3 being neutral, and 5 being a very good fit. Bubble in one number from each brand for each model. ivioael A 173. Seventeen magazine 174. Cosmopolitan magazine 175. CK Obsession perfume 176. Clinique Happy perfume iviouel a 177. Seventeen magazine 178. Cosmopolitan magazine 179. CK Obsession perfume 180. Clinique Happy perfume Very Bad Fit 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Very Bad Fit 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Neutral 3 3 3 3 Neutral 3 3 3 3 Very Good Fit 5 5 5 5 Very Good Fit 5 5 5 5 Model C 181. Seventeen magazine 182. Cosmopolitan magazine 183. CK Obsession perfume 184. Clinique Happy perfume Model D 185. Seventeen magazine 186. Cosmopolitan magazine 187. CK Obsession perfume 188. Clinique Happy perfume Very Bad Fit 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Very Bad Fit 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Neutral 3 3 3 3 Neutral 3 3 3 3 Very Good Fit 5 5 5 5 Very Good Fit 5 5 5 5 189. Please indicate your gender. (A) Male (B) Female 190. Please indicate your race. (A) White, non-Hispanic (B) Black, non-Hispanic (C)Hispanic (D) Asian/Pacific Islander (E) Other 191. Do you currently have a job? (A) Yes, Full-time (B) Yes, Part-time (C) No 192. How much money do you normally spend per month on personal items (non-necessities) such as entertainment and clothing? (A) $0-49 (B) $50-99 (C) $100-149 (D) $150+ Thank you for your time and participation. LIST OF REFERENCES Babbie, Earl (2001), The Practice of Social Research. California: Wadsworth. Baker, Michael J., and Gilbert A. Churchill (1977), The Impact of Physically Attractive Models on Advertising Evaluations," Journal ofMarketing Research, 14, 538-555. Bower, Amanda B., and Stacy Landreth (2001), "Is Beauty Best? Highly Versus Normally Attractive Models in Advertising," Journal ofAdvertising, 30 (1), 1-12. Caballero, Marjorie J., and William M. Pride (1984), "Selected Effects of Salesperson Sex and Attractiveness in Direct Mail Advertisements," Journal ofMarketing, 48, 94-100. Caballero, Marjorie J., and Paul J. Solomon (1984), "Effects of Model Attractiveness on Sales Response," Journal ofAdvertising, 13 (1), 17-33. Davis, Joel J. (1997), Advertising Research: Theory and Practice. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Dolich, Ira J. (1969), "Congruence Relationships between Self Images and Product Brands," Journal ofMarketing Research, 6, 80-84. Eagly, Alice H., Richard D. Ashmore, Mona G. Makhijani, and Laura C. Longo (1991), "What is Beautiful is Good, But...: A Meta-Analytic Review of Research on the Physical Attractiveness Stereotype," PsychologicalBulletin, 110 (1), 109-128. Englis, Basil G., Michael R. Solomon, and Richard Ashmore (1994), "Beauty Before the Eyes of Beholders: The Cultural Encoding of Beauty Types in Magazine Advertising and Music Television," Journal ofAdvertising, 23 (2), 49-64. Fallon, April (1990), "Culture in the Mirror: Sociocultural Determinants of Body Image," In Thomas F. Cash and Thomas Pruzinsky (Eds.), Body Images: Development, Deviance, and Change (pp. 80-109). New York: The Guilford Press. Friedman, Hershey H., and Linda Friedman (1979), "Endorser Effectiveness by Product Type," Journal of Advertising Research, 19 (October), 63-71. Frith, Katherine, Ping Shaw, and Hong Cheng (2005), "The Construction of Beauty: A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Women's Magazine Advertising," Journal of Communication, 55 (1), 56-70. Hong, Jae W., and George M. Zinkhan (1995), "Self-Concept and Advertising Effectiveness: The Influence of Congruency, Conspicuousness, and Response Mode," Psychology and Marketing, 12 (1), 53-77. Huckeba, Jennifer (2005), "Emotional Response to Beauty," Unpublished master's thesis, University of Florida. Images de Parfums: Collection of fragrance advertisements (2006), Retrieved February 20, 2006, from http://perso.wanadoo.fr/imagesdeparfums/en/. Jenkins, Maureen (2005, August 24), "Aging Gracefully; Cosmopolitan, 'The Bible for Fun, Fearless Females,' Turns 40," Chicago Sun-Times, 64. Joseph, W. Benoy (1982), "The Credibility of Physically Attractive Communicators: A Review," Journal ofAdvertising, 11 (3), 15-24. Kahle, Lynn R., and Pamela M. Homer (1985), "Physical Attractiveness of the Celebrity Endorser: A Social Adaptation Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 954-961. Kamins, Michael A. (1990), "An Investigation into the 'Match-Up' Hypothesis in Celebrity Advertising: When Beauty May be Only Skin Deep," Journal of Advertising, 19 (1), 4-13. Lynch, James, and Drue Schuler (1994), "The Matchup Effect of Spokesperson and Product Congruency: A Schema Theory Interpretation," Psychology & Marketing, 11 (5), 417-445. Martin, Mary C., and James W. Gentry (1997), "Stuck in the Model Trap: The Effects of Beautiful Models in Ads on Female Pre-Adolescents and Adolescents," The Journal ofAdvertising, 26 (2), 19-33. Martin, Mary C., and Patricia F. Kennedy (1994), "Social Comparison and the Beauty of Advertising Models: The Role of Motives for Comparison," Advances in Consumer Research, 21, 365-371. Martin, Warren S., and Joseph Bellizzi (1982), "An Analysis of Congruous Relationships between Self-Images and Product Images," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 10, 473-489. Maynard, Michael L., and Charles R. Taylor (1999), "Girlish Images Across Cultures: Analyzing Japanese Versus U.S. Seventeen Magazine Ads," Journal ofAdvertising, 28 (1), 39-48. Mazur, Allan (1986), "U.S. Trends in Feminine Beauty and Overadaptation," The Journal of Sex Research, 22 (3), 281-303. Mehta, Abhilasha (1999), "Using Self-Concept to Assess Advertising Effectiveness," Journal ofAdvertising Research, 81-89. Mish, Frederick C. (Ed.), (1989), The New Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster Inc. Parekh, Hetal, and Suresh Kanekar (1994), "The Physical Attractiveness Stereotype in a Consumer-Related Situation," The Journal of Social Psychology, 134 (3), 297-300. Peterson, Robert A., and Roger A. Kerin (1977), "The Female Role in Advertisements: Some Experimental Evidence," Journal ofMarketing, (October), 59-63. Rhodes, Gillian, Johanna Roberts, and Leigh W. Simmons (1999), "Reflections on Symmetry and Attractiveness," Psychology, Evolution & Gender, 1 (3), 279-295. Sarwer, David B., Leanne Magee, and Vicki Clark (2004), "Physical Appearance and Cosmetic Medical Treatments: Physiological and Socio-Cultural Influences," Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2, 29-39. Singh, Devendra (1993), "Adaptive Significance of Female Physical Attractiveness: Role of Waist-to-Hip Ratio," Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 65 (2), 293-307. Singh, Devendra (1994), "Ideal Body Shape: Role of Body Weight and Waist-to-Hip Ratio," International Journal ofEating Disorders, 16 (3), 283-288. Sirgy, Joseph M. (1982), "Self-Concept in Consumer Behavior: A Critical Review," Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 287-300. Solomon, Michael R., Richard D. Ashmore, and Laura C. Longo (1992), "The Beauty Match-Up Hypothesis: Congruence Between Types of Beauty and Product Images in Advertising," Journal ofAdvertising 21 (4), 23-34. Stein, Dena (2004), "Testing the Reliability and Validity of a Brand-Personality Measurement Tool," Unpublished master's thesis, University of Florida. Till, Brian D., and Michael Busler (2000), "The Match-Up Hypothesis: Physical Attractiveness, Expertise, and the Role of Fit on Brand Attitude, Purchase Intent and Brand Beliefs," Journal ofAdvertising, 29 (3), 1-13. Zerbowitz, Leslie A., Karen Olson, and Karen Hoffman (1993), "Stability of Babyfaceness and Attractiveness Across the Lifespan," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64 (3), 453-466. Zinkhan, George M., and Jae W. Hong (1991), "Self Concept and Advertising Effectiveness: A Conceptual Model of Congruency, Conspicuousness, and Response Mode," Advances in Consumer Research, 18, 348-354. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Danae Barulich was born on February 4, 1982, in Woodside, New York. She moved to Europe with her parents and attended the first and second grade in Croatia before moving back to New York. She spent most of her time growing up in Orlando after moving from New York when she was young. In May, 2000, she earned a B.A. in Advertising and Public Relations at the University of Central Florida. She expects to receive her Master of Advertising degree from the University of Florida in August 2006. After graduation, she plans to pursue a career in advertising in the Central Florida area. |