<%BANNER%>

Will Consumers' Level Of Knowledge Influence Their Attitudes Toward Celebrity-Endorsed Products?

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042193/00001

Material Information

Title: Will Consumers' Level Of Knowledge Influence Their Attitudes Toward Celebrity-Endorsed Products?
Physical Description: 1 online resource (84 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Yang, Wei-Hsuan
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2010

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: brand, celebrity, consumer, endorsement, product
Journalism and Communications -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Advertising thesis, M.Adv.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: The main purpose of this study was to examine whether consumers knowledge influences their attitudes and purchase intentions when they confront advertisements with different degrees of congruity of celebrity-endorsed products. The hypotheses were based on schema incongruity theory, a subject that has enjoyed popularity among researchers. Lee and Thorson (2008) stated that consumers evaluate celebrity endorsements more positively in terms of purchase intention when there is moderate incongruity between the endorser and endorsed product. In addition, three knowledge measures, subjective knowledge, familiarity, and brand association, were used to measure participants knowledge of a specific endorsed product. One hundred thirty-four students participated in the experiment. The students were randomly assigned to participate under three different conditions. The questionnaire employed contained two sections; the first measured participants knowledge levels and the second measured their attitudes toward the endorsed product. Although the results of this research did not support the hypotheses, the study provided evidence that all participants behave favorably under high-congruence conditions. In addition, it indirectly supported the schema congruity theory used in most previous studies. The results also supported evidence from previous studies that knowledge plays an important role in consumer behavior (Brucks, 1985; Moore & Lehmann, 1980; Punji & Staelin, 1983).
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Wei-Hsuan Yang.
Thesis: Thesis (M.Adv.)--University of Florida, 2010.
Local: Adviser: Weigold, Michael F.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2010
System ID: UFE0042193:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042193/00001

Material Information

Title: Will Consumers' Level Of Knowledge Influence Their Attitudes Toward Celebrity-Endorsed Products?
Physical Description: 1 online resource (84 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Yang, Wei-Hsuan
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2010

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: brand, celebrity, consumer, endorsement, product
Journalism and Communications -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Advertising thesis, M.Adv.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: The main purpose of this study was to examine whether consumers knowledge influences their attitudes and purchase intentions when they confront advertisements with different degrees of congruity of celebrity-endorsed products. The hypotheses were based on schema incongruity theory, a subject that has enjoyed popularity among researchers. Lee and Thorson (2008) stated that consumers evaluate celebrity endorsements more positively in terms of purchase intention when there is moderate incongruity between the endorser and endorsed product. In addition, three knowledge measures, subjective knowledge, familiarity, and brand association, were used to measure participants knowledge of a specific endorsed product. One hundred thirty-four students participated in the experiment. The students were randomly assigned to participate under three different conditions. The questionnaire employed contained two sections; the first measured participants knowledge levels and the second measured their attitudes toward the endorsed product. Although the results of this research did not support the hypotheses, the study provided evidence that all participants behave favorably under high-congruence conditions. In addition, it indirectly supported the schema congruity theory used in most previous studies. The results also supported evidence from previous studies that knowledge plays an important role in consumer behavior (Brucks, 1985; Moore & Lehmann, 1980; Punji & Staelin, 1983).
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Wei-Hsuan Yang.
Thesis: Thesis (M.Adv.)--University of Florida, 2010.
Local: Adviser: Weigold, Michael F.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2010
System ID: UFE0042193:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text





WILL CONSUMERS' LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE INFLUENCE THEIR ATTITUDES
TOWARD CELEBRITY-ENDORSED PRODCUTS?




















By

WEI-HSUAN YANG


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

2010

































2010 Wei-Hsuan Yang
































To my family









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my chair, Dr. Michael Weigold for offering me great advice so

that I can successfully complete my thesis and therefore, furthered my understandings

in field of advertising. I would also like to express my sincere appreciation to the

committee members, Dr. Debbie Treise and Dr. Robyn Goodman, for their patience in

constantly providing me with valuable comments.

Furthermore, I would like to thank my editor, my older sister, who not only helped

me proofread my paper, but also provided helpful suggestions. She gave me courage

and strength, which sustained me along this process. I would also like to acknowledge

the contribution from the other editor, Michael Kung, who has worked closely with me in

improving this paper.

Last but not least, I feel deeply grateful about the supports from all my friends and

my classmates, Yang, Liuyi and Lee, Seoungchul. Particularly, Miss. Yang has been

supporting me through sharing her thoughts when I encounter problems of this thesis.

They have played instrumental roles in making my experience with the University of

Florida more meaningful and memorable.









TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS............................... ...........................

L IS T O F T A B L E S ................ .................................. ......................... 7

L IS T O F F IG U R E S ................ .................................. ......................... 8

A B S T R A C T ................. ......................................................................................................... 9

CHAPTER

1 IN T R O D U C T IO N ................ .................................. ............................................... 1 1

2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................ ................ 14

E n d o rs e m e n t................................................................ 14
How Do Endorsements Work? ........................... ......... ..........14
Celebrity Endorsement ............................................... ...... .......... 17
How Does Celebrity Endorsement Work Effectively?............................. ........... 17
Schema (Congruity/ Incongruity) Theory .................. .................. 19
Knowledge .............................................................................22
Brand Knowledge-Keller's Customer-Brand Equity Model ...........................24
Product Knowledge ................................................... 26
A ttitu d e ............. ........... .................. ........................................................................... 2 8

3 C O NC EPTUA LIZAT IO N ................................... ....... .................................. 30

Different Levels of Knowledge: Expert/Novice .......................... ...... ................ 30
Knowledge Measures ...... .................. .......... ......... 31
Congruity ......... .................. .......................... ............... 32
Hypotheses .............. .............................................. ..... .... ......... 33

4 METHODOLOGY ............... ......... ........ .................... 34

Experimental Design ...... .................................... 34
Pretest .............. ...................................... ........ ........................ 34
Second Pretest ......................................................................... ........................ 35
Stimuli Materials .......................... ...... ..............36
Sample and Procedure ......... ... ........................ 36
Measures of Knowledge ......... .... ....................... 37
Subjective Knowledge ............... ................... 37
Usage Experience ..... ......... ..... ............ ......... 37
Brand Awareness/Association ............................ .. ......... ............ 37
Measures of Brand Attitude and Purchase Intention ................................... 38









5 RESULTS ......................... ................. .................... 39

Descriptive Analysis .................................................................................. ..................39
M measures .................................................. ............... ................ ........ 40
Dependent M easures......... ......................................... ...... ................ 40
Brand Association ................................. ........ 41
Subjective Knowledge .................. .. ............... ...... .. ...... 42
Fam iliarity .............. ........................ .................................. 42
Test of the Hypotheses ........ .... ................................. ........ ................ 43
E x p e rts .............. ..... ............ ................. ................................................ 4 4
Novices ...................... .... ...................... 45
Additional Findings ......................... ........ .........45

6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION .................................. ....... 47

S u m m a ry .............. ................. ................. ................................................ 4 7
D is c u s s io n .............. .. ............... ................. .............................................. 4 8
E x p e rts .............. ..... ............ ................. ................................................ 4 8
Novices ...................... .... ...................... 49
Congruence .......... .. ... ............ ................ 50
Im plications .............. ........... ..... .... .. ........ .............. ................50
Limitations of the Research and Directions for Future Research ........................... 52

APPENDIX

A SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ............ .. .......... ............ 55

B SECOND PRE-TEST ......................... ......... .........67

C SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ......... ........ ..............................68

LIST OF REFERENCES .............. ......... ................. 78

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................. .............................. 84

















6










LIST OF TABLES


Table page

5-1 Sample demographic characteristics.................... ...................... 39

5-2 Sum m ary of variables ....... ... ............................ ........ ...... .... .......... ..... 41

5-3 Simple correlation among association index score, subjective knowledge
index score, and familiarity index score ......... ......... .. ........ ............ 41

5-4 Simple correlation among brand association index score, attitude index
score, and purchase intention index score........................... ........ ......... ....... 42

5-5 Simple correlation among subjective knowledge index score, attitude index
score and purchase intention index score........... .......... .......... ......42

5-6 Simple correlation among familiarity index score, attitude index score, and
purchase intention index score............... ........ .......... ..................... 43

5-7 Between-subject effects, dependent variable: Attitude ................... ................44

5-8 Between-subject effects, dependent variable: Purchase intention ................. 44

5-9 Simple Correlation among awareness index score, attitude index score, and
purchase intention index score............... ........ .......... ..................... 46

5-10 Simple Correlation among experience index score, attitude index score, and
purchase intention index score............... ........ .......... ..................... 46









LIST OF FIGURES

Figure page

2-1 D im tensions of brand aw areness ................................... ..................................... 25

4-1 Total scores each celebrity receiveved. ............................................ 35









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

WILL CONSUMERS' LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE INFLUENCE THEIR ATTITUDES
TOWARD CELEBRITY-ENDORSED PRODUCTS?


By

Wei-Hsuan Yang

August 2010

Chair: Michael F. Weigold
Major: Advertising

The main purpose of this study was to examine whether consumers' knowledge

influences their attitudes and purchase intentions when they confront advertisements

with different degrees of congruity of celebrity-endorsed products.

The hypotheses were based on schema incongruity theory, a subject that has

enjoyed popularity among researchers. Lee and Thorson (2008) stated that consumers

evaluate celebrity endorsements more positively in terms of purchase intention when

there is moderate incongruity between the endorser and endorsed product. In addition,

three knowledge measures, subjective knowledge, familiarity, and brand association,

were used to measure participants' knowledge of a specific endorsed product.

One hundred thirty-four students participated in the experiment. The students were

randomly assigned to participate under three different conditions. The questionnaire

employed contained two sections; the first measured participants' knowledge levels and

the second measured their attitudes toward the endorsed product.

Although the results of this research did not support the hypotheses, the study

provided evidence that all participants behave favorably under high-congruence









conditions. In addition, it indirectly supported the schema congruity theory used in most

previous studies. The results also supported evidence from previous studies that

"knowledge plays an important role in consumer behavior" (Brucks, 1985; Moore &

Lehmann, 1980; Punji & Staelin, 1983).









CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Researchers have become increasingly interested in examining the effects of

knowledge on consumer behaviors (Brucks, 1985; Moore & Lehmann, 1980; Punji &

Staelin, 1983). Brand knowledge, which interacts with internal and external factors,

indeed plays an important role in consumers' purchasing behaviors. Researchers

believe that "consumer knowledge is important both to theoretical models of consumers

and to marketing practice" (Flynn & Goldsmith, 1999, p. 57).

Brand knowledge is conceptualized and measured in different ways; that is,

researchers have addressed brand knowledge using different dimensions. For example,

Bettman and Park (1980) measured familiarity and past experience, while Keller (1993)

developed a custom-based brand equity model that contained two different types of

brand knowledge: brand awareness and brand image. Park et al. (1992) defined

consumer knowledge via two dimensions: actual knowledge (AK) and self-assessed

knowledge (SAK). Philippe and Ngobo's (1999) two dimensions (familiarity and product

knowledge) of consumer knowledge tested the differences between consumers with

high versus low levels of brand knowledge.

This researcher used Brucks' (1985) measurements for objective knowledge,

subjective knowledge, and prior experience. These measurements have been widely

adopted and are highly regarded among researchers who study consumer decision

making. The measurements have also been used to examine the effects of information

search, perceived decision outcomes, and attribute importance (Raju et al., 1995).

Additionally, Brucks' (1985) product class knowledge classification is more detailed than

other measurements.









Subjective knowledge is defined as an "individual's perception of how much s/he

knows," while objective knowledge is defined as "the amount, type, or organization of

what an individual actually has stored in memory" (Brucks, 1985, p. 1). Brucks (1985)

also stated that "experience-based measure gauges the amount of purchasing or user

experience with the product" (p. 1). In addition to Brucks' measurements, this research

used concepts of Keller's (1993) brand equity to measure consumers' brand awareness

because Brucks' measurement does not assess whether consumers' brand knowledge

influences their attitudes and purchase intentions toward endorsed products and

celebrity endorsers. Keller (1993) considered attributes, benefits, and brand attitudes as

important determinants of consumers' purchase decisions; he said that "brand

associations can be influenced when a brand becomes linked with a celebrity through

an endorsement or when it is linked with a sporting event through sponsorship activities"

(Keller, 1993, p. 10). To sum up, this study used two researchers' measurements to

gauge consumers' brand knowledge.

Though brand knowledge is considered important to the marketplace, some

marketers are unsure how brand knowledge fits into different marketing plans. To draw

consumers' attention amid all the advertising clutter, marketers try to differentiate their

product from those of their competitors. Celebrity endorsement is considered effective in

achieving this goal. Marketing practitioners spend a lot of money each year on

endorsers for advertising campaigns (Mittelstaedt et al., 2000). In the past, researchers

applied different theories to evaluate the effectiveness of celebrity endorsement,

including image transfer (McCracken, 1989), schema theory (Misra & Beatty, 1990;

Lynch & Schuler, 1994), associative network (Martindale, 1991), and the filtering model









(Taylor & Crocker, 1981). These theories address the connection between celebrity

endorsers and their endorsed products. Moreover, most researchers have primarily

focused on the physical attractiveness and expertise of celebrity endorsers, in addition

to congruity issues. For example, the congruity between celebrity endorser and

endorsed product has been widely studied to examine whether the level of credibility

increases when endorsers and their endorsed products are congruent. However, few

studies have considered such factors as consumers' knowledge.

This thesis is an examination of the relationships between consumers'

brand/product knowledge and celebrity endorsements. Do consumers with different

levels of knowledge respond differently to celebrity endorsements? Will consumers'

brand/product knowledge influence their responses to different levels of product

congruity and celebrity endorser? Answering these questions could help marketers

decide whether an endorsement is appropriate for situations with different levels of

consumer involvement.

This research used a high technology-oriented product to serve as an

experimental object. Chang and Mendonca (2004) studied how different product types

may affect consumer cognition and browsing behavior. They categorized a digital

camera in the high-price/high-involvement section because consumers perform

research, including reading customer reviews, product descriptions, and product

features and exploring the product category based on their schema, before making

purchase decisions (Chang & Mendonnca, 2004). Additionally, Roehm and Sternthal

said that "highly knowledgeable consumers may exhibit a tendency to delve into the

details of the message, especially for high technology-oriented products" (2000, p. 261)









CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

Endorsement

During past years, "millions of dollars have been spent annually on celebrity

endorsement contracts on the premise that source effects play an important role in

persuasive communications" (Tripp et al., 1994, p. 535). Many researchers have studied

the effectiveness of these endorsements (Biswas et al., 2006; Friedman & Friedman,

1979; Goldsmith et al., 2000; Gwinner & Eaton, 1999; Kim & Na, 2007; Lee & Thorson,

2008; Lynch & Schuler, 1994; McCracken, 1989; Misra & Beatty, 1990; Till & Shimp,

1998b). Some have stated that endorsement is an effective marketing tool, while others

have argued that it is risky, especially celebrity endorsement (Till & Shimp, 1998b).

Tellis (2004) categorized endorsements into three categories: expert, celebrity, and lay

endorsements. Biswas and Das (2006) also broke down endorsement into three types:

expert endorsement, celebrity endorsement, and non-celebrity non-expert endorsement.

Tellis (2004) and Biswas and Das (2006) defined these three categories similarly:

Experts are "individuals or organizations that the target population perceives as having

specialized knowledge in a particular area," celebrities are "individuals who are well-

known to the population because of the publicity associated with their lives," and lay

endorsers are defined as "initially unknown or fictitious individuals or characters used as

a spokesperson in an ad" (Tellis, 2004, p. 180).

How Do Endorsements Work?

The process of endorsement is complex and involves the interaction of source,

product, message, and situational factors (Mittelstaedt et al., 2000). Endorsement has

been widely considered an effective marketing tool to enhance consumers' awareness,









improve consumers' memory, and reinforce the image of endorsed products. When it

comes to what makes endorsement work effectively, researchers have developed

different theories: image transfer (McCracken, 1989), source credibility model (Hovland

& Weiss, 1951-1952), and source attractiveness model (McGuire, 1985).

Image transfer "takes place as a result of a number of marketing related activities"

(Smith, 2004, p. 458). The image transfer model illustrates the process of how

meanings are passed from celebrity to product and then from product to consumer

(Smith, 2004). McCracken (1989) suggested that "the effectiveness of an endorser

depends, in part, on the meanings he or she brings to the endorsement process" (p.

315). Gwinner (1997) noted that when celebrity endorser and endorsed product are

paired in an advertisement, the meaning of the celebrity moves to the product; that is,

"meanings associated with the celebrity would become associated with the product in

the mind of the consumer" (as cited in McCracken, 1989, p. 147). "The transfer process

is completed when a consumer acquires/consumes the product, thus transferring the

meaning to the user" (Gwinner & Eaton, 1999, p. 48).

The source credibility model (Hovland model) suggested that "the effectiveness of

message depended on the expertnesss' and 'trustworthiness' of the source"

(McCracken, 1989, p. 310). Goldsmith et al. (2000) stated that credibility is defined as

"the extent to which the source is perceived as possessing expertise relevant to the

topic of the communication and can be trusted to give an objective opinion on the

subject" (as cited in Belch & Belch, 1994; Ohanian, 1990, p. 43). These two dimensions,

expertise and trustworthiness, of the source credibility model have been considered

crucial in conceptualizing credibility and persuading consumers (Goldsmith et al., 2000).









Tellis (2004) argued that the "central premise of Source Credibility theory was that the

acceptance of a message depends on the source's quality. Expertness and

trustworthiness are two key qualities that, if present to a sufficient degree, will lead the

audience to accept and internalize the message communicated" (Tellis, 2004, p. 181).

McCracken (1989) defined expertness as "the perceived ability of the source to make

valid assertions and trustworthiness as the perceived willingness of the source to make

valid assertions" (p. 311).

The source attractiveness model (McGuire model) asserts that "the effectiveness

of a message depends on the similarity, familiarity and liking of an endorser" (Kim & Na,

2007, p. 311). McCracken (1989) defined familiarity as "knowledge of the source

through exposure, likability as affection for the source as a result of the source's

physical appearance and behavior and similarity as the resemblance between the

source and receiver of the message" (p. 311). Kahle and Homer (1985) found that

physically attractive celebrity endorsers, when endorsing beauty-enhancing products,

generate a positive effect on consumers' brand attitudes, purchase intentions, brand

recall, and recall of advertisement-related issues. Tellis (2004) posited that the reason

the source attractiveness model (McGuire model) is effective is conditioning. He defined

conditioning as "a process by which effect or response to a particular source is

transferred to a target by the regular association of the two stimuli" (Tellis, 2000, p. 183).

Each of the theories has been expanded upon by many researchers with different

perspectives and from different fields. Most researchers have focused on one type of

endorsement (expert, celebrity, or lay) and evaluated its effectiveness. The majority

believes that celebrity endorsement is "effective in dimensions such as trustworthiness,









believability, persuasiveness, and likability" (Biswas et al., 2006; Freiden, 1984;

Friedman & Friedman, 1979; Till & Shimp, 1998b). "If the goal is to elicit awareness of

the product, then a celebrity would probably work best" (Freiden, 1984, p. 40).

Celebrity Endorsement

Celebrity endorsement is widely used in advertisements to improve the effects of

persuasive communication (Heerden et al., 2008). McCracken (1989, p. 310) classified

celebrity advertisements into four types: explicit, implicit, imperative, and copresent

modes. "I endorse the product" is an example of the explicit mode, "I use this product" is

an example of the implicit mode, "You should use this product" is an example of the

imperative mode, and the copresent mode is exemplified by ads "in which the celebrity

merely appears with the product." McCracken (1989) further defined a celebrity

endorser as "any individual who enjoys public recognition and who uses this recognition

on behalf of a consumer good by appearing with it in an advertisement" (p. 310). Seno

and Lukas (2007) defined the image of a celebrity as "the perceptions about an

individual who enjoys public recognition as reflected by the celebrity associations held in

consumer memory" (p. 122).

How Does Celebrity Endorsement Work Effectively?

As discussed above, celebrity endorsement is considered the most effective

endorsement among all types of endorsements; it is commonly used in advertisements

to improve the effectiveness of persuasive communication (Kim & Na, 2007). For

example, compared to non-celebrity endorsements, the use of celebrity endorsement is

considered "more interesting," "stronger," and "more effective" in beer commercials.

Additionally, the use of celebrity endorsers is believed to improve the endorsed brands'

reception (Heerden et al., 2008).









Researchers have developed different theories to evaluate the effectiveness of

celebrity endorsement, including the associative network model (Craik & Lockhart,

1972), the match-up hypothesis (Kahle & Hommer, 1985), and the schema congruity

theory (Lynch & Schuler, 1994; Kamins, 1990).These theories have been widely used in

celebrity endorsement-related studies in the past.

The associative network model has been used to support the conceptualization of

transfer in celebrity endorsements (Till & Shimp, 1998b) and explains "how the memory

of brands is activated when allied together to produce transfer" (Smith, 2004, p. 460).

Misra and Beaty (1990) stated that "information not consistent with an individual's

schema may be quite significant and informative and, therefore, be attended to more

closely and be processed more deeply" (p. 162). Till (1998a) stated that the "key

aspects of this model include a set of processing units (nodes), a state of activity, a

pattern of connectivity among units, and a learning rule that allows patterns of

connectivity to be modified based on experience" (as cited in Rumelhart et al.,1986, p.

401). In the marketplace, consumers may possess a greater association set for a

certain celebrity than for a certain brand; "in that case thinking of the brand is more

likely to activate the celebrity node than thinking about the celebrity is to activate the

brand node" (Till & Shimp, 1998b, p. 69).

The match-up hypothesis implies that "highly relevant characteristics of the

spokesperson are consistent with the highly relevant attributes of the brand" (Misra &

Beaty, 1990, p. 161). Kamins (1990, p. 4) suggested that the match-up hypothesis

implies that "the physical attractiveness of a celebrity endorser may only enhance both

product and ad-based evaluations if the product's characteristics 'match up' with the









image conveyed by the celebrity." The results of match-up experiments suggest that this

hypothesis is likely to generate better recall and brand information (Misra & Beaty,

1990). Additionally, "if consumers perceive a strong relationship between the persona of

the endorser and the brand name of the product, the endorsers are effective" (Misra &

Beaty, 1990, p. 160).

Schema (Congruity/ Incongruity) Theory

One explanation that supports the effectiveness of the match-up theory is the

schema theory (Lynch & Schuler, 1994; Gwinner & Eaton, 1999; Misra & Beaty, 1990).

Gwinner and Eaton (1999) noted that "schema theory is based on research which found

that memory is not a verbatim account of past experiences, but rather a blend of both

specific memories and general abstractions about types of people, activities, and

objects" (as cited in Bartlett, 1932; Runelhart & Ortony, 1977, p. 49). Schema theory

implies that "consumers have preconceived opinions of both the brands involved in the

sponsorship and the categories to which these brands belong" (Smith, 2004, p. 460). In

addition, consumers use these schemas to judge the brands' "match-up" (Smith, 2004,

P.460). Smith (2004) further suggested that schema theory is used to explain "how the

categories from which the brands come affects the way memory is activated and match-

up occurs" (p. 460). It represents a system that lets people function in a complicated

environment (Gwinner & Eaton, 1999). Kim and Na (2007) conducted two experiments

to evaluate the fit between endorsers and endorsed products and how it influenced

attitudes toward the endorsed products. They demonstrated that when a celebrity

endorser and endorsed product have a good fit, consumers evaluate an endorsed

product more favorably. Schema theory is a useful framework to examine why the

match and mismatch conditions illustrated in the literature might have influenced









consumers' reactions toward brands, spokespersons, and an attractiveness-related

product (Lynch & Schuler, 1994). Misra and Beatty (1990) concluded that when a

congruent relationship exists between spokesperson and brand, consumers recall

information about the brand more easily.

Lynch and Schuler (1994) used schema theory to interpret previous inquiries into

the match-up hypothesis. They examined the match-up hypothesis and found that the

congruence in advertisements between celebrity endorsers' characteristics and

endorsed product attributes was connected to observed variations in source credibility

and other advertising measures. Moreover, they used schema theory to develop

experiments to demonstrate how the spokesperson/product match could change the

schema.

It has been stated that the integration between the matched or credibility concept

with the spokesperson schema is related to Kamins' (1990) conclusion that an attractive

endorser and attractiveness-related product match may enhance the credibility of the

endorser (Lynch & Schuler, 1994). Additionally, the results of the match-up may

generate a new schema and new information. Lynch and Schuler (1994) found that

"there was no change occurring between the product schema at the time of exposure

and the subsequent schema of the product/brand as affected by that exposure" (p. 425).

This is because the concept of "attractive" already exists in the product schema, and the

attractiveness-attractiveness match develops no new information. Kamins' (1990)

findings were also consistent with Lynch and Schuler's (1994) interpretation, which

found that "no significant differences in brand evaluations related to the match/no-match









treatments. This is not to say that the brand schema in this instance is likely to be

entirely unchanged" (Lynch & Schuler, 1994, p. 425).

Even though many researchers have stated that congruence between endorser

and endorsed product will lead to more favorable attitudes toward the product, some

researchers think that moderate incongruity may draw more of the consumers' attention

to the product than extreme congruity or extreme incongruity. Meyers-Levy and Tybout

(1989, p. 51) concluded that "moderate schema incongruity resulted in more favorable

evaluations than schema congruity or extreme schema incongruity." Lee and Thorson's

(2008) research revealed that consumers evaluate celebrity endorsements more

positively in terms of purchase intention when there is moderate incongruity between

the endorser and endorsed product. Dimofte et al. (2003, p. 9) explained that

consumers would generate favorable attitudes toward inconsistent information because

a "clear distinction must be made between information that is incongruent with extant

product attitudes versus extant advertisement schema." Schema incongruity was

thought to be important to marketers because "the degree to which information is

discrepant from schema expectations can affect a number of consumer judgments such

as product evaluation and product ratings" (Desai & Gencturk, 1995, p. 39).

Lee (1995) concluded that when consumers evaluate products, they engage in

different types of information processing because the procedure depends on product-

schema congruity and involvement. Lee (1995) further explained that when consumers

think the information is congruent, they make less effort to evaluate it. Even if they think

the information does not match, they do not use a piecemeal process unless

something/someone requires them to do so. According to Lee (1995, p. 214), "[i]t is only









when the information is incongruent with the category schema and they are highly

involved with the evaluation situation that they engage in attribute-based piecemeal

processing." Peracchio and Tybout (1996, p. 179) stated that consumers with

elaborated knowledge will "moderate how an activated schema affects product

evaluations."

Prior research has focused on the relationships between a brand and a product

category. This study took it a step further to address the relationships between celebrity

endorser and endorsed products and hypothesized that a similar process occurs

between them. Therefore, this study suggested that the congruity that exists between

celebrity endorsers and their endorsed products will influence attitude and purchase

intention (Priester et al., 2004).

This study was intended to measure participants' knowledge, purchase intention,

and attitudes to examine whether consumers with high brand knowledge influence the

effectiveness of celebrity endorsement; we also investigated whether consumers with

different levels of knowledge involved in different levels of congruity between celebrity

endorsers and endorsed products generate different attitudes and purchase intentions

toward the endorsed products.

Knowledge

Consumer knowledge has been investigated by many researchers (Baker et al.,

2002; Brucks, 1985; Flynn & Goldsmith, 1999; Gronhaug et al., 2002; Keller, 1993;

Pappu et al., 2005; Park et al., 1992; Philippe & Ngobo, 1999; Raju et al., 1995; Schmitt

& Geus, 2006). Some researchers (Gronhaung et al., 2002; Brucks, 1985) measured

consumers' knowledge to examine the influence of their abilities to search information,









and some discussed the roles of knowledge and involvement (Baker et al., 2002) or

extended the previous measurement (Philippe & Ngobo, 1999).

The definitions and measurements of knowledge vary; Keller (1993) defined brand

knowledge as having two dimensions, brand awareness and brand image; Philippe and

Ngobo (1999) pointed out two major dimensions of knowledge: familiarity and product

knowledge; Brucks (1985) described three categories of consumer knowledge (subject

knowledge, object knowledge, and prior experience); Park et al. (1992) defined

knowledge as having two dimensions: actual knowledge (AK) and self-assessed

knowledge (SAK). Philippe and Ngobo (1999) said that "knowledge is a

multidimensional construct because there are different types of knowledge (e.g.,

objective vs. subjective, brand vs. product type knowledge)" (p. 569).

Philippe and Ngobo (1999) reexamined the previous knowledge assessment

issues and used wine as an experimental object to measure consumers' familiarity and

product knowledge. They concluded that there are four elements of knowledge:

familiarity, objective product category information, objective expertise, and subjective

expertise. The conclusions were consistent with previous studies that suggested

knowledge is a multidimensional construct. Familiarity was defined as behavioral

content of knowledge with two dimensions: depth and breadth. Product knowledge is

composed of two components: product class information and expertise (Philippe &

Ngobo, 1999).

Park et al. (1992) examined how product expertise and knowledge of brands,

attributes, and features affected consumers' thoughts. They discussed the relationships

between the two constructs of knowledge: actual knowledge and self-assessed









knowledge. AK was considered "an objective measure of factual memory content" and

SAK was considered "a perceptual measure of memory content." "AK may provide raw

material for problem solving, and lead to increased efficiency in search, and, hence

better accuracy in problem solving; SAK may provide the motivation to search for and

process task-relevant information" (Park et al., 1992, p. 193).

Brand Knowledge-Keller's Customer-Brand Equity Model

It is crucial to "understand the content and structure of brand knowledge because

they affect what comes to mind when a consumer thinks about a brand" (Keller, 1993, p.

2). Schmitt and Geus (2006) created a conceptual model that indicated how three

variables-perception, cognition, and relationship-are consistent and how they

mutually affect current and future purchase intentions. They said "brand knowledge

variables assess how customers perceive and evaluate brands" (Schmitt & Geus, 2006,

p. 98). Keller (1993) conceptualized brand knowledge "according to an associative

network memory model in terms of two components, brand awareness and brand

image" (p. 1). Brand awareness is considered consistent with brand recall and

consumers' recognition performance; it is defined as "how easy it is for the consumer to

remember the brand" (Schmitt & Geus, 2006, p. 99). Pappu et al. (2005) also said that

brand awareness "consisted of both brand recognition and brand recall" (as cited in

Keller, 1993, p. 145).

Aaker (1996) suggested different brand equity based on Keller's (1993) customer-

brand equity. He structured brand equity in four dimensions: loyalty, perceived quality,

associations, and awareness. Loyalty was defined as "the attachment that a customer

has to a brand"; perceived quality was defined as quality that "provided value to

consumers by giving them a reason to buy and by differentiating the brand from









competing brands" (Pappu et al., 2005, p. 145). Associations were defined as "involving

image dimensions that are unique to a product class or brand" (as cited in Aaker, 1991).

Aaker (1996) stated that brand awareness can influence perceptions and attitudes.

Additionally, it also "reflects the salience of the brand in the customer's mind" (Aaker,

1996, p. 144). Six levels of awareness have been identified: recognition, "recall, top-of-

mind, brand dominance, brand knowledge, and brand opinion" (Aaker, 1996, p. 144).



Brand

Reca lI
Brand -

Awareness

Brand

Recognition

Figure 2-1. Dimensions of brand awareness

Figure 2.1 was modified based on Keller's (1993) summary of dimensions brand

knowledge. Brand awareness includes two primary components, "brand recall and

brand recognition" (p. 3). Brand recognition involves consumers' abilities to recall

previous experience with the brand when the brand is presented. Consumers need to

accurately indicate whether they have seen or heard of the brands presented. In

contrast, brand recall involves customers' abilities to relate to the brand when presented

with a product category. Customers need to accurately identify the brand from their

memory (Keller, 1993).

Brand image is considered a set of associations connected to the brand that

consumers store in memory (Keller, 1993). Brand associations fall into four categories:









"types of brand association, favorability of brand associations, strength of brand

association, and uniqueness of brand association" (p. 3). Types of brand association

are further classified into three categories: attributes, benefits, and attitudes. Attributes

are "descriptive features that characterize a product or service" (Keller, 1993, p. 4).

Thus, attributes are related to what consumers think about the product or service. Brand

attribute consists of two components: product-related attributes and non-product-related

attributes. Benefits are "the personal value consumers attach to the product or service"

(Keller, 1993, p. 4); they are related to what consumers believe the product or service

can do for them. Benefits consist of functional, experiential, and symbolic benefits.

Attitudes are considered the basis of consumerism and are defined as "consumers'

overall evaluations of a brand" (Keller, 1993, p. 4).

According to Keller (1993, p. 8), "high levels of brand awareness and a positive

brand image should increase the probability of a brand choice, and lead to greater

consumer loyalty and decrease vulnerability." In addition, perceptual and cognitive

models suggest that brand knowledge influences consumers' responses to the brand

(Schmitt & Geus, 2006). Schmitt and Geus (2006) further stated that current behavior

refers to the brand purchase and its usage; future behavior refers to purchase intention

toward a brand.

This research used concepts from Keller's customer-brand equity model, that is,

the measure of brand awareness and brand image.

Product Knowledge

As mentioned before, Philippe and Ngobo (2006) classified consumer knowledge

into product (class) knowledge and product familiarity. Baker et al. (2002) stated that

"product knowledge is a complex, multidimensional construct that is characterized by









the structure and the content of information stored in memory" (as cited in Alba &

Hutchinson, 1987, p. 47). Product knowledge is considered an important factor in the

research on consumer decision making (Raju et al., 1995). Flynn and Goldsmith (1999,

p. 57) stated that "there are three distinct but related ways in which consumer

knowledge is conceptualized and measured: objective knowledge, subjective

knowledge, and experience." Researchers have divided product class knowledge into

three categories. "The first measures an individual's perception of how much s/he

knows. The second measures the amount, type, or organization of what an individual

actually has stored in memory. The third category measures the amount of purchasing

or user experience with the product" (Brucks, 1985, p. 1); product knowledge plays an

important role in the consumer decision-making process (Raju et al., 1995, p. 155).

Biswas and Sherrell (1993) stated that product knowledge includes information

about the functional attributes of the product class and how such attributes contribute to

brand differences. They further defined an expert as "an individual whose perception of

his overall product knowledge is high" and a novice as "an individual whose perception

of his overall product knowledge is low" (Biswas & Sherrell, 1993, p. 34). Maheswaran

and Sternthal (1990) noted that "a technical attribute focus is likely to be effective

because experts are able to infer all of the related benefits and find technical description

to be more convincing" (as cited in Alba & Hutchinson, 1987, p. 67). "The consumers

with high levels of objective knowledge may be more discriminating about certain

attributes" (Raju et al., 1995, p. 158). Novices tend to focus on consistent information

while experts tend to infer, recall, and describe the inconsistent situation (Fiske et al.,

1983). Fiske et al. (1983) further stated that experts may consider more inconsistent









information than novices when they are deciding among materials that contain both

inconsistent and consistent information. Expert consumers are also thought to be more

easily influenced by the match or mismatch of information to category knowledge than

novice consumers (Sujan, 1985).

Petty et al. (1997, p. 632) stated that "prior knowledge can both foster thinking

about a message and help people bolster initial opinions." Low-familiar consumers tend

to use extrinsic cues, such as price, to evaluate a product because there is little intrinsic

product information stored in their memories; this causes consumers to develop

incomplete schema, which makes processing intrinsic information more difficult (Rao &

Monroe, 1988).

Attitude

Attitude has been defined in a variety of ways, but can generally be considered as

an evaluation or judgment of an object in question as positive, negative or somewhere

in between (Petty et al, 1997). Petty et al (1997) stated that "conceptualizing attitudes

as having affective (emotional) and cognitive (belied) bases has been one of the most

popular means of classifying the different types of information upon which attitudes are

based" (Petty et al, 1997, p.613). "The main issue of attitude theory is the relation

between attitudes and the experience that underlies them" (Eaglyet al, 1994, p. 113).

One commonly discussed hypothesis states that attitudes are referred to the

evaluations of attitude objects, develop from people's cognitions, that is, from the ideas

that people form about the attitude objects (Eagly et al, 1994). Past researchers usually

used close-ended questionnaires to measure subjects' cognitions and affection. While

some researchers (Eagly et al, 1994) chose a different way (open-ended), there is no

confirmation whether this is an improvement over the traditional close-ended measures.









In addition, Debono and Omoto (2001) and Allport (1935) noted that the concept of

attitude was believed to influence behaviors. Petty et al (1997) stated that "one's history

of choosing attitude-relevant situations predicted willingness to engage in future

behavior more for low than high self-monitors" (as cited in Debono and Snyder's 1995,

p.635). Fabrigar et al (2006) stated that conceptualization of knowledge shows that the

greater knowledge will enhance attitude-behavior consistency. "The present

experimental demonstrations of effects for knowledge provide some of the strongest

evidence to date that knowledge plays an important role in attitude-behavior

consistency" (Fabrigar et al, 2006, p.574).









CHAPTER 3
CONCEPTUALIZATION

Extending from previous theories, this study proposes a hypothesized model that

incorporates the variables of expert/novice and high, medium and low levels of

congruity. Constructs in this model are the subjects' level of knowledge, levels of

congruity, attitude toward the endorsed product, and purchase intention.

Different Levels of Knowledge: Expert/Novice

Alba and Hutchinson (1987) described experts as those who "have base

knowledge structures that is richly endowed with attribute information as well as

abstract information about structural relations," and novices as being "likely to have

knowledge structure that may include some attribute information but relatively little

abstract information about underlying concepts (p. 259) (as cited in Roehm &

Sternthal, 1997).

Consumers will compare their perceptions of the characteristics of a celebrity

endorser with the perceived advertised benefits of the endorsed products to determine

the "fit" between the celebrity and the product (Misra & Beaty, 1990). Novices tend to

focus on consistent information, while experts tend to infer, recall, and describe

inconsistent conditions (Fiske et al., 1983). According to Fiske et al., experts may also

consider inconsistent information more than novices do when they are making a

decision involving a product with a match that is either highly inconsistent or highly

consistent. Consumer experts are more likely to be influenced by a marked match or

mismatch than are novice consumers (Sujan, 1985).









Knowledge Measures

Philippe and Ngobo (2006) stated that consumer knowledge includes two

dimensions-product knowledge and familiarity -where product knowledge is

measured in terms of subjective knowledge, objective knowledge and experience, and

familiarity is described as a "behavior component of knowledge" (p.569). Brucks (1985)

observed that "the 'subjective knowledge' measures an individual's perception of how

much s/he knows, 'objective knowledge' measures the amount, type, or organization of

what an individual actually stores in memory, and 'experience' measures the amount of

purchasing or usage experience with the product" (p.1).

Keller (1993) conceptualized brand knowledge "according to an associative

network memory model which consists of two components, brand awareness and brand

image" (p.1). Brand awareness is consistent with brand recall and consumers'

recognition performance such that brand awareness can be measured by "how easy it

is for the consumer to remember the brand" (Schmitt & Geus, 2006, p. 99). Keller

(1993) defined brand image as the set of associations connected to a brand that

consumers store in memory. Aaker (1996) measured this association on four different

levels-perceived value, personality, organization and differentiation-and suggested

that "brand associations could provide value to the consumers by providing a reason for

consumers to buy a product and by creating positive attitudes/feelings among

consumers" (Aaker, 1991, p.145).

The current study used three knowledge measures-familiarity, subjective

knowledge and brand association-to measure subjects' knowledge. Objective

knowledge is excluded because of the difficulty in measuring it; previous studies have









focused on the product category instead of a specific brand, resulting in the absence of

accurate and proven criteria usable for measuring objective knowledge.

Congruity

Meyers-Levy and Tybout (1989) defined congruity as "a match between the

attributes of an object/product and a relevant schema, whereas incongruity involves

some form of mismatch" (p. 41). Lee and Thorson (2008) suggested that incongruity

occurs when the image of celebrity is inconsistent with the endorsed product such that a

clear link between them is absent.

Lee (1995) contended that consumers engage in processing different types of

information when they evaluate products because the procedure depends on product-

schema congruity and involvement. When the information is considered congruent,

consumers make less effort to go through the information. Lee and Thorson (2008)

revealed that consumers evaluated celebrity endorsements more positively in terms of

purchase intention when there was a moderate incongruity between the endorser and

endorsed product and concluded that participants with higher degrees of product

involvement were more likely to be influenced by the impact of celebrity-product

congruence. In other words, compared to participants with low product involvement,

those with higher product involvement tend to exert more cognitive efforts to understand

the association between celebrity endorsers and their endorsed products.

In addition, Alba et al. (1987) found that schema-inconsistent facts are recalled

more accurately than schema-consistent ones. As a result, if a product's features are

inconsistent with a consumer's expectations for the product or its class, the consumer

should easily recall those features, especially if the consumer is an expert.









Hypotheses

Meyers-Levy and Tybout (1989) and Lee and Thorson (2008) found that

consumers evaluated celebrity endorsements more positively in terms of purchase

intention when there was a moderate incongruity between the endorsers and their

endorsed products. However, Fiske et al. (1983) found that novices tend to focus on

consistent information, while experts are able to infer, recall, and describe inconsistent

situations to a larger extent than consistent situations. Therefore, we form the following

hypotheses:

H1. Experts generate more positive attitudes toward moderately incongruous

endorsed products than toward highly congruous or highly incongruous endorsed

products.

H2. Experts generate greater purchase intentions toward moderately incongruous

endorsed products than toward highly congruous or highly incongruous endorsed

products.

H3. Novices generate more positive attitudes toward highly congruous endorsed

products than toward moderately incongruous or highly incongruous endorsed products.

H4. Novices generate greater purchase intentions toward highly congruous

endorsed products than toward moderately incongruous or highly incongruous endorsed

products.









CHAPTER 4
METHODOLOGY

Experimental Design

The purpose of this study was to understand whether consumers' different levels

of knowledge influence their attitudes toward celebrity-endorsed products; therefore, 2

(expert, novice) X 3 (high congruity, moderate incongruity, high incongruity) factorial

experiments were applied in the study.

Pretest

The purpose of this pretest was to establish the celebrity endorsers for the

experiment. Thirty students took the pretest at the University of Florida during the spring

semester of 2010. They were asked to evaluate their familiarity with the endorsed

product, a Canon branded digital camera, and then to rate each celebrity according to

how appropriate they thought the endorser was for the specific endorsed product. Some

celebrities from Lee and Thorson's (2008) pretest were used. Ten celebrities were

selected based on "five criteria: high ratings on the match-up factor, salience, high

familiarity, little recall of the prior endorsement, and overall favorableness" (p. 437).

Because this pretest focused on college students, two celebrities were removed from

the list and then eight additional celebrities were added based on their popularity. The

participants were simultaneously presented with a picture of Canon's digital camera and

pictures of the celebrities. Assuming the celebrities endorsed Canon's digital camera,

the participants then evaluated the level of congruity between the camera and the

celebrities. This study used the scales from Lee and Thorson's (2008) pretest, which

include six 7-point bipolar items: "very appropriate/very inappropriate, very

consistent/inconsistent, very likely/very unlikely, very relevant/irrelevant, matches very









well/does not match, and goes together/does not go together" (Lee & Thorson, 2008, p.

438). The results of this pretest were used to classify the three celebrity endorsers into

high congruity, moderate incongruity, and high incongruity, depending on the total

scores. Following the pretest, the print ads were simulated featuring the celebrity

subjects chosen from the pretest.

Celebrity Jessica Alba received the highest scores in this pretest, while Bob Dole

received the lowest (see Figure 4.1).

The SPSS system was used to examine the reliability of the scale. The alpha

score was 0.96; this indicated that the scale had high internal consistency (reliability).









4 I-o-" I I I II U. I I ,





Figure 4-1. Total scores each celebrity receiveved.

Second Pretest

The purpose of the second pretest was to make sure that participants were

familiar with the celebrities presented in the first pretest. Fifteen students participated in

the second pretest. They were asked to write down the name of each celebrity they

could recall. They were told to write "DK," which stands for "don't know," for celebrities

whose name they did not know. The results of the pretest showed the level of familiarity









by celebrity. The level of familiarity of Sally Field, Bob Dole, Maria Sharapova, and

Kiefer Sutherland was below 80%; therefore, these four celebrities were eliminated from

the celebrity list. The remaining celebrities were Jessica Alba, Cameron Diaz, Merryl

Streep, Jack Black, Ben Affleck, and Avril Lavigne. Jessica Alba, Ben Affleck, and Avril

Lavigne were then classified into high congruity, moderate incongruity, and high

incongruity, respectively, based on the scores they received in the first pretest.

Stimuli Materials

The stimuli were simulated print advertisements. The advertisements featured a

Canon digital camera (SD 980 IS Digital ELPH) paired with different celebrity endorsers

selected from the pretest. This study used similar content for all three advertisements

to minimize the influence of factors other than the endorsers. Each advertisement

included one slogan and a brief description of the Canon digital camera.

Sample and Procedure

The participants were students from the University of Florida. Gender was not

considered and participants' ages ranged from 18 years old to 34 years old. At the

beginning of the experiment, the researcher assured participants that their personal

information and responses would be confidential and anonymous. They received a

questionnaire and were asked to read the first page of the instructions.

The questionnaire contained two sections; the first measured the participants'

levels of knowledge, and the second measured their attitudes toward the endorsed

product (see Appendix B). One hundred thirty-four students participated in the

experiment. They were randomly assigned to different situations (high congruity,

moderate congruity, high incongruity). After participants answered the knowledge-

measuring questions in the first section, they were presented with different print ads.









A total of 18 questions (association: 10; subjective knowledge: 7; familiarity: 1)

were used to measure participants' knowledge.

Measures of Knowledge

This research relied on Brucks' (1985) product class knowledge and part of

Aaker's (1996) awareness and association to measure participants' recall, recognition,

perceived value, personality, differentiation, and organizational associations of the

brand.

Subjective Knowledge

This study used a format based on Flynn and Goldsmith's (1999) definition to

measure subjective knowledge. They defined subjective knowledge as "a consumer's

perception of the amount of information they have stored in their memory" (Flynn &

Goldsmith, 1999, p. 59). They further developed seven statements based on self-

assessments of the product and used a 7-point Likert scale to record answers. Some of

questions were reversed or shared the same meanings; therefore, this research used

the seven original questions.

Usage Experience

This researcher applied Bettman and Park's (1980) measurements, asking

participants whether they had ever searched for information on, used, or owned a digital

camera.

Brand Awareness/Association

This part involved a modification of Aaker's (1996) measurement to examine how

well participants recalled and recognized a specific brand (top-of-mind awareness and

brand-opinion awareness). Participants answered two open-ended questions:

List all brands of digital camera which you can recall.









What is your favorite digital camera?

Moreover, they were provided with 10 questions modified from Aaker's

measurement. These questions included four dimensions: perceived value, personality,

organization, and differentiation.

Measures of Brand Attitude and Purchase Intention

This study used Westover and Randle's (2009) measurements to measure

participants' brand attitudes and purchase intentions. Participants answered three

attitude-relevant questions using a 7-point semantic differential scale (strongly

like/strongly dislike, positive/negative, favorable/unfavorable) and three questions

related to purchase intention using a 7-point semantic differential scale (unlikely/likely,

definitely would not/definitely would, improbable/probable).









CHAPTER 5
RESULTS

Descriptive Analysis

Among the 134 survey participants, 49 (36.6%) were male, and 85 (63.4%) were

female. Their ages ranged from 18 to 34; the mean age was 22.6 (see Tablel). Of the

participants, 73 (54.5%) were Caucasian, 11 (8.2%) were African American, 33 (24.6%)

were Asian, 13 (9.7%) were Latino, 4 (3%) were anther ethnicity (see Table 5-1).

Table 5-1. Sample demographic characteristics
Characteristic N
Gender Male 49
Female 85
Age 18-25 108
26-30 19
31-36 7
Ethnicity Caucasian 73
African American 11
Asian 33
Latino 13
Other 4


80.6% of all subjects were able to recall the brand "Canon" when asked, "List all

brands of digital camera that you can recall"; 33.6% of all subjects considered Canon as

their favorite brand of digital camera brand when asked, "What is your favorite digital

brand?"; 62.7 % of all participants had searched for information about Canon's digital

camera when asked, "Have you ever searched for information about Canon's digital

camera?" and 38.8% of subjects owned Canon digital cameras when asked, "Do you

own a Canon digital camera?".









Measures

Mean scores for each measurement item and scale were computed and provided

in Table 5-2. The results showed that the mean score of brand association was 4.81

(SD = 0.96), subjective knowledge was 3.66 (SD = 1.22), and familiarity was 4.47 (SD =

1.56).

The three knowledge measures, subjective knowledge, familiarity, and brand

association, were summed to create on expertise measure. The 134 respondents had a

mean of 9.96 (SD = 2.26) on the expertise measures, with the maximum and minimum

score being 15.49 and 4.70 respectively.

The mean scores of respondents for brand association (10 items), subjective

knowledge (7 items), and familiarity (1 item) averaged and then summed to create the

expertise scale. The median of the mean scores was 10.319.

A median split (median = 10.319) was used to create the expert and novice

groups. As a result, a total of 134 participants were included in the following analysis: 68

subjects (25 were male and 43 were female) were categorized in the expert group and

66 subjects (24 were male and 42 were female) were classified as the novice group.

The results showed that the mean scores of expert and novice groups were 11.77 (SD =

1.24) and 8.10 (SD = 1.40), respectively (see Table 5-2).

Dependent Measures

The dependent variables of attitude (a = .90) and purchase intention (a = .93)

were operationalized using 7-point semantic differential scales. Appendix C shows the

items used for these two variables. The results showed that the mean score of attitude

was 4.65 (SD = 1.08); purchase intention was 3.56 (SD = 1.62) (see Table 5-2).









The three construct (brand association, subjective knowledge, familiarity) were

expected to positively correlate with one other. A correlation analysis was conducted,

Table 5-2. Summary of variables
Variables M SD a
Brand association 4.81 0.96 0.90
Subjective knowledge 3,66 1.23 0.90
Familiarity (single item) 4.47 1.56
Expert/Novice (N=134) 9.96 2,26
Expert (N=68) 11.77 1.24
Novice (N=66) 8.10 1.40
Attitude toward to endorsed product 4.65 1.08 0.90
Purchase intention 3.57 1.62 0.94

and a measure of each construct was obtained by averaging items.

The results revealed significant correlations among all three measures. The

correlation coefficient between brand association and subjective knowledge was 0. 44

(p < 0.01); the correlation coefficient between brand association and familiarity was 0.50

(p < 0.01), and the correlation coefficient between familiarity and subjective knowledge

was 0.69 (p < 0.01) (see Table 5-3).

Table 5-3. Simple correlation among association index score, subjective knowledge
index score, and familiarity index score
Variables Brand association Subjective knowledge
Brand association
Subjective knowledge .44**
Familiarity .50** .69**
Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01.


To further examine the relations among three constructs and dependent variables,

correlations were used.

Brand Association

The correlation coefficient between attitude and brand association was 0.31, this

suggested that subjects who had high brand association also had a more positive









attitude toward the endorsed product (p < 0.01). Moreover, the result also revealed that

the correlation coefficient between purchase intention and brand association was 0.38.

This indicated that subjects with high brand association were more interested in

purchasing the camera; the result was also statistically significant (p < 0.01) (see Table

5-4).

Table 5-4. Simple correlation among brand association index score, attitude index
score, and purchase intention index score.
Variables Brand association Attitude
Brand association
Attitude .31**
Purchase intention .38** .37**
Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01.

Subjective Knowledge

Seven statements employing a 7-point likert scale were given to the subjects to

examine their self-assessment about the product. A correlation analysis was used to

examine the relations between consumers' subjective knowledge and their attitude and

purchase intention. The correlation coefficient between purchase intention and

subjective knowledge was 0.25 (p < 0.01). However, the correlation between attitude

and subjective knowledge was not statistically significant (see Table 5-5).

Table 5-5. Simple correlation among subjective knowledge index score, attitude index
score and purchase intention index score.
Variables Subjective knowledge Attitude
Subjective Knowledge
Attitude -.01
Purchase intention .25** .37**
Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01.


Familiarity

Correlation analysis was used to assess how familiar the subjects were with

Canon digital camera. The correlation coefficient between purchase intention and









familiarity was 0.31 (p < 0.01); however, the correlation between attitude and familiarity

was not statistically significant (see Table 5-6).

Table 5-6. Simple correlation among familiarity index score, attitude index score, and
purchase intention index score.
Variables Familiarity Attitude
Familiarity
Attitude .04
Purchase intention .31** .37**
Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01.

Test of the Hypotheses

A 2 (expert versus novice) X 3 (congruent versus moderately incongruent versus

highly incongruent) experimental design was used first. A univariate analysis of variance

was conducted to identify the relationships among these variables.

In the first ANOVA test, expertise and congruence were treated as the

independent variables and attitude was the dependent variable. A significant main effect

of expertise emerged in the test (F (1, 128) = 4.19, p < 0.05), the expert group (Mean=

4.83, SD= 0.13, N= 68) had more positive attitudes than did the novice group (Mean=

4.36, SD= 0.13, N= 66) (see Table 5-7).

The main effect of congruence on attitude was also significant (F (2,128) = 3.06, p

< 0.05) (see Table 5-7). The results indicated that mean score of congruity was 4.94;

moderate incongruity was 4.61; high incongruity was 4.39. Post hoc analysis using the

Scheffe post hoc criterion indicated the three congruities were not significantly different

from each other No two-way interaction effect was observed.

For the second ANOVA test, expertise and congruence were also treated as

independent variables and purchase intention was the dependent variable. The main









effect of expertise on purchase intention was significant (F (1,128) = 6.21, p < 0.05)

(see Table 5-8).



Table 5-7. Between-subject effects, dependent variable: Attitude.
Sum of df F-test P
Squares
Level of Between groups 4.71 1 4.19* 0.04
knowledge Within groups 143.82 128
Degree of Between groups 6.87 2 3.06* 0.050
congruence Within groups 143.82 128
Note.1. *p<.05

The result also revealed that the expert group (Mean= 3.91, SD= .19, N= 68)

generated greater purchase intention than the novice group (Mean= 3.22, SD= .20, N=

66). However, the main effect of congruence on purchase intention was not statistically

significant, this suggested that different degrees of congruence instead of purchase

intentions, influence consumers' attitude toward the endorsed product. No two-way

interaction was observed.

Table 5-8. Between-subject effects, dependent variable: Purchase intention.
Sum of df F-test P
Squares
Level of Between groups 15.63 1 6.21* 0.01
knowledge Within groups 322.11 128
Note.1. *p<.05


Experts

Although the absence of two- way interactions for purchase intention and attitude

suggested problems for the main hypotheses, simple effects tests were still performed

to check on the validity of the productions these were reported in the sections that

follow.









Hypothesis 1 predicted that experts would show more positive attitudes toward

moderately incongruous endorsed products than congruence endorsed products and

highly incongruous endorsed products.

Among experts only, the effect of congruence on attitude was not statistically

significant, F (2, 65) = 2.05, p= 0.14.

Hypothesis 2 predicted that experts would show greater purchase intention toward

moderately incongruous endorsed products than congruous endorsed products and

highly incongruous endorsed products.

The result revealed that the effect of congruence on purchase intention was not

statistically significant, F (2, 65) = 0.86, p= 0.43.

Novices

Hypothesis 3 predicted that novices would show positive attitude toward

congruously endorsed product than moderately incongruously and highly incongruous

endorsed products.

Among novices only, the result revealed that the effect of congruence on attitude

was not statistically significant, F (2, 63) = 1.29, p = 0.28.

Hypothesis 4 predicted that novices would show greater purchase intentions

toward congruously endorsed product than moderately incongruous and highly

incongruous endorsed products. The result indicated that the effect of congruence on

purchase intention was not statistically significant, F (2, 63) = 1.14, p = 0.33.

Additional Findings

The Brand awareness section included questions that asked respondents to list all

digital camera brands that they could recall as well as indicate their favorite brand of

digital camera.









The correlation coefficient between purchase intention and awareness was 0.24 (p

< 0.01); however, the correlation between attitude and awareness was not significant

(see Table 5-9).

Table 5-9. Simple Correlation among awareness index score, attitude index score, and
purchase intention index score.
Variables Awareness Attitude
Awareness
Attitude .13
Purchase intention .24** .37**
Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01.

Usage experience section included three questions that asked whether

respondents had ever searched for information about a Canon digital camera, whether

they owned one, and the frequency of usage if they owned a Canon digital camera.

The correlation coefficient between attitude and experience was 0.27, which

suggested that subjects who were experienced had a more positive attitude toward the

endorsed product (p < 0.01). Moreover, the results further indicated that correlation

between experience and purchase intention was 0.37 (p < 0.01) (see Table 5-10).

Table 5-10. Simple Correlation among experience index score, attitude index score, and
purchase intention index score.
Variables Experience Attitude
Experience
Attitude .27**
Purchase intention .37** .37**
Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01









CHAPTER 6
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Summary

In this study, three knowledge measures-familiarity, subjective knowledge, and

brand association-were used to create an expertise scale to measure consumers'

knowledge. This research corresponds with Fiske et al.'s (1994) observation "that both

brand knowledge and product category knowledge are acquired through experience

with the product category, and are thus integrally related in most circumstances" (p. 43).

The three measures were derived from brand knowledge and product category

knowledge and were empirically highly correlated with one another. Although no

interaction of expertise and congruence was observed, the research showed that

experts engender more positive attitudes and greater purchase intentions toward the

endorsed product among consumers than novices do. The results correspond with Mita

and Sujan's (1985) statement that "expert consumers would produce more total

response to communications" (p. 34).

In addition, there is a significant effect of congruence on attitude, despite post hoc

analysis that indicated that the congruence among print ads was not statistically

significantly different. Participants showed a more positive attitude toward highly

congruent (M = 4.95) endorsed products than moderately incongruent (M = 4.60) or

highly incongruent endorsed products (M = 4.39). This result is consistent with Kim and

Na's (2007) findings which demonstrated that when a celebrity endorser and an

endorsed product have a good fit, consumers evaluate the endorsed product more

favorably.









Moreover, participants' answers to two open-ended questions ("list all brands of

digital cameras you can recall" and "what is your favorite digital camera") reveal that

participants with high brand awareness have greater purchase intentions than those

with lower brand awareness. This result partly supports Hoyer and Brown's (1990)

conclusion that "brand awareness may have considerable effect on consumer choice"

(p. 147). This result also indicated that experienced participants have more positive

attitudes and greater purchase intentions than those who are less experienced.

Discussion

Experts

The study proposed that experts have a more positive attitude and greater

purchase intentions toward moderately congruent endorsed products than toward highly

congruent or highly incongruent endorsed products based on previous research

(Hypotheses 1 and 2). Lee and Thorson's (2008) research suggested that, in evaluating

celebrity endorsements, consumers have greater purchase intentions when moderate

incongruity exists between the endorsers and their endorsed products and that

participants with higher product involvement are more likely to be influenced by

celebrity-product congruence (p. 9).

However, the results of the current research did not reveal a more positive attitude

or greater purchase intentions toward moderately incongruent endorsed products. This

result can be attributed to several causes. First, a digital camera is a high-price/high-

involvement product for which consumers perform research, including reading customer

reviews, product descriptions, and product features and exploring the product category

based on their schemas before making purchase decisions (Chang & Mendonnca,

2004). In addition, a study by Roehm and Sternthal (2001) reported that "highly









knowledgeable consumers may exhibit a tendency to delve into the details of the

message, especially for high technology-oriented products" (p. 261). In other words,

experts are likely to conduct research before they purchase a technology-oriented

product, so celebrity endorsements may not play a significant role in experts' product

evaluation. This point of view is in keeping with Biswas et al.'s (2006) finding that expert

consumers are not easily influenced in their decision-making by a celebrity endorser.

Additionally, because participants had a one-week window in which to complete

the survey, they may not have taken the survey seriously. If the participants felt that the

survey was not important, their concentration when answering the questions and

reviewing the simulated print advertisements could have been affected. It is also

possible that the participants discussed the survey with other participants who received

the survey.

Novices

In measuring purchase intention and attitude, the current study found that the

novice group did not behave as expected under different degrees of congruence. The

study hypothesized that novices would generate greater purchase intentions and more

positive attitudes toward highly congruent endorsed products than moderately

incongruent or highly incongruent endorsed products (Hypotheses 3 and 4). Several

reasons explain why novices exhibited behaviors different from those expected. First,

some participants failed to recall digital cameras in the first section of the survey; for

example, 29% of the novice participants were not able to recall the Canon brand versus

10% of expert participants. Second, novices were less familiar with Canon's digital

camera (M = 3.44) than experts were (M = 5.44). Since some novices were not familiar

with the endorsed brand, the degrees of congruity between celebrity endorsers and









endorsement may not have been a factor in moderating their attitudes and purchase

intentions toward the endorsed product.

Furthermore, Rao and Monroe (1988) stated that consumers with low familiarity

tend to use extrinsic cues such as price to evaluate a product. However, the simulated

print ads did not provide price information, which could potentially impact the purchase

intentions of novice participants. Overall, novices generated fewer purchase intentions

in all three congruity situations.

Congruence

The study found that different degrees of congruence could influence participants'

attitudes toward the endorsed product. The mean suggested that, when their attitude is

measured, participants score higher under high-congruence conditions (M = 4.95) than

moderate-incongruence (M = 4.60) or high-incongruence conditions (M = 4.39). This

result was consistent with previous studies that found that "schema congruity leads to a

favorable response because other things being equal, people like objects that conform

to their expectations and allow predictability" (Meyers-Levy & Tybout, 1989).

To sum up, although the results of this research did not support the hypotheses, it

still provides evidence that all participants behave favorably under high-congruence

conditions. In addition, it indirectly supports the schema congruity theory used in most

previous studies. The results also support evidence from previous studies that

knowledge plays an important role in consumer behavior.

Implications

The results indicated that both novice and expert participants responded to

endorsed products based on their levels of congruity. The participants had a more

positive attitude toward highly congruent endorsed products than toward moderately









incongruent or highly incongruent endorsed products. Therefore, the findings suggest

that, when marketers consider using celebrity endorsements, a high level of congruence

between a high-tech product that requires consumer knowledge and an endorser with a

matching image will better motivate consumers. Through marketing protests, marketers

can evaluate the congruity between celebrity endorsers and endorsed products before

they run advertisements.

Moreover, the results indicated that consumers who are familiar with the products

or more experienced with the products had higher purchase intentions than those who

were not familiar with them or who were less experienced. Therefore, it is

recommended that companies focus more on current consumers than potential

consumers by, for example, improving the quality of consumer service after each

purchase. This approach could increase consumers' satisfaction with a company as well

as with its products. Since current consumers are likely to be more familiar and

experienced with the product, the possibility of re-purchase increases when they receive

high-quality, post-purchase service.

Furthermore, the results derived from the questions in the brand association

section suggested that brand association correlates with participants' attitudes and

purchase intentions. Therefore, marketers should consider differentiating their products

by reinforcing their brand.

The results also showed that consumers who received high scores in the brand

awareness section (recognition task) were more likely to purchase the product than

those who scored low in this section. The result implied that if consumers can recall a

specific brand the first time they're asked, they are more inclined to purchase products









of that brand. Therefore, the amount of exposure to a product plays an important role in

consumers' purchase intention. Consumers who receive more information and high

levels of exposure to a product demonstrate greater purchase intentions because they

store the image of the product in their consideration set, which is critical when

developing purchase intentions. Thus, marketers can hold events and use public

relations strategies to reach consumers and increase exposure of their products, as well

as their company.

The last section of the questionnaire consisted of self-assessment questions

through which participants were asked to measure their knowledge regarding Canon.

The results indicated that consumers who consider themselves experts in the field

exhibit greater purchase intention than those who do not. The correlation between

subjective knowledge and consumers' purchase intention was statistically significant.

Therefore, high-tech product manufacturers should give consumers more opportunities

to gain knowledge about their products, thereby reducing consumers' fear of high-tech

products. This study suggests that marketers can build an informative Web site that not

only provides up-to-date information about a product, but also interacts with consumers.

This approach could provide consumers with a more thorough understanding of the

product.

Limitations of the Research and Directions for Future Research

Several limitations of this study may affect the research results. First, the sample

size (134 students) was not large and did not result in statistical significance in the

interaction test.

Second, previous studies focused on product categories instead of a specific

brand and did not provide an objective knowledge scale for a specific brand; therefore,









this study did not use objective knowledge, which may have influenced the validity of

the expertise scale used.

Third, this study used only one specific product instead of a broad range of digital

cameras. This limitation could decrease the resulting purchase intention and influence

consumers' positive attitudes because some consumers may consider themselves

experts in digital cameras instead of loyal consumers of Canon.

Fourth, consumers who already owned a digital camera or who had recently

purchased one may be reluctant to buy another in the next year, which may have

influenced their reporting of purchase intention.

Finally, the participants in this study were primarily college students, so they may

not have enough money to purchase high-priced products, which may have influenced

their reporting of purchase intention.

This research has potential for future expansion. Although this research did not

generate statistically significant evidence of a connection between expertise and

congruence in terms of purchase intention and attitude, the hypotheses proposed, while

unsupported, may not be false. Future researchers who build a complete experimental

design and collect more data may obtain results that support these hypotheses. In

addition, because of the absence of an appropriate criterion, this research did not use

objective-knowledge questions to measure participants' knowledge, which could have

decreased the validity of the expertise scale created for this study. Future research

could adopt more types of knowledge measures, such as knowledge of product

categories, brand knowledge, and prior knowledge, to evaluate participants' expertise,









attitudes, and purchase intentions. This approach could create a different perspective in

the research into celebrity endorsement.

Although considerable research has already been devoted to this topic, these

studies have focused primarily on the relationship between endorser-product congruity

and attitude, instead of on the consumers' level of knowledge. Future research could

measure the effect of endorser-product congruity in terms of product attributes, price,

content, and similar factors.

Another opportunity for future research is to expand upon the two dependent

variables of attitude and purchase intention used in this study to include, for example,

product evaluation, intention to recommend endorsed products to friends, and length of

time between purchases of the same product.

To sum up, future research should explore more variables to assist marketers in

choosing endorsers appropriate for various marketing scenarios. Knowledge in this area

is particularly critical for high-tech product manufacturers, which need consumers to

become heavily involved in their marketing campaigns.









APPENDIX A
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

Part A. Please read the following question carefully, and circle one choice from the

scale that most accurately reflects your opinion.


1. How familiar are you with Canon's line of digital cameras?

Not very familiar (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)


Very familiar








Part B. Please read the following question carefully, and circle one choice from the

scale that most accurately reflects your opinion.


1. Imagine tennis star Maria Sharapova was being considered as a celebrity endorser
for this canon camera. In your opinion, this would be....


1*N1^


Very Inappropriate

Very Inconsistent

Very Unlikely

Highly Irrelevant

Does not match

Does not go together


(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)


Very Appropriate

Very Consistent

Very Likely

Highly Relevant

Matches very well

Goes together









2. Imagine Avril Lavigne was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon
camera. In your opinion, this would be....


Very Inappropriate


Very Inconsistent


Very Unlikely


Highly Irrelevant


Does not match


Does not go together


,









(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together









3. Imagine Jack Black was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon
camera. In your opinion, this would be....


*I r


~I~-*0 i,
-c Z


Very Inappropriate

Very Inconsistent


Very Unlikely

Highly Irrelevant


Does not match


Does not go together


(4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate


(4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent


(4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely


(4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant


(4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well

(4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together









4.Imagine Meryl Streep was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon
camera. In your opinion, this would be....


"*'* \ 1 I
*^ ^^.*A -


Very Inappropriate


Very Inconsistent


Very Unlikely


Highly Irrelevant


Does not match


Does not go together


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together








5. Imagine Ben Affleck was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon
camera. In your opinion, this would be....


Very Inappropriate

Very Inconsistent

Very Unlikely

Highly Irrelevant

Does not match

Does not go together


(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together









6. Imagine Cameron Diaz was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon
camera. In your opinion, this would be....


-c
p..


Very Inappropriate


Very Inconsistent


Very Unlikely


Highly Irrelevant


Does not match


Does not go together


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together








7. Imagine Bob Dole was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon
camera. In your opinion, this would be....


Very Inappropriate

Very Inconsistent

Very Unlikely

Highly Irrelevant

Does not match

Does not go together


I -,







(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together









8. Imagine Jessica Alba was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon
camera. In your opinion, this would be....


Very Inappropriate

Very Inconsistent

Very Unlikely

Highly Irrelevant

Does not match

Does not go together


(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together









9. Imagine Kiefer Sutherland was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this
canon camera. In your opinion, this would be....

I "" ^ ^


A"


Very Inappropriate


Very Inconsistent

Very Unlikely

Highly Irrelevant

Does not match


Does not go together


(4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate


(4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent

(4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely

(4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant

(4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well

(4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together








10. Imagine Sally Field was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon
camera. In your opinion, this would be....


Very Inappropriate

Very Inconsistent

Very Unlikely

Highly Irrelevant

Does not match

Does not go together


\ i \







(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together









Part C. The following are demographic questions and will only be used for statistical

analyses.

1. What is your name 2. UF ID

3. What is your gender?

I Male

I Female

4. How old are you? __ years old.

5. What is your major?

6. Year in school?

I Graduate

D Senior

I Junior

I Sophomore

I Freshman

I Other

7. Ethnicity

a White

D African American

I Asian

I Latin

I Other

Thank you for your participation!








APPENDIX B
SECOND PRE-TEST

Please write down the name of each celebrity if you can. If you do not know put DK for
don't know.


I I
I I







l Il


I 1


I 1


I I









APPENDIX C
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE


Part A. Please read the following question carefully, and circle one choice from the

scale that most accurately reflects your opinion.



1. Brand Awareness

(1) List all brands of digital camera which you can recall?

(2) What is your favorite digital camera?









2. Association

Indicate that you agree/disagree the following statements regarding "Canon", the
camera brand?

Perceived value

(3)Canon digital camera provides good value for the money.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


(4)There are good reasons to buy Canon digital camera versus competing brand.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


Personality

(5)The brand, Canon has a personality.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


(6) The brand, Canon is interesting.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


(7)1 have a clear image of the type of person who would use a Canon camera.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


Organization

(8)1 trust the Canon Company.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree









(9) I admire the Canon Company.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


(10)1 believe Canon has established its credibility among many consumers

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


Differentiation

(11)Canon digital cameras are different from competing brands.
Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


(12)Canon digital cameras are basically the same as competing brands.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


3. User Experience

(13) Have you ever searched for information about Canon digital camera?

Yes No

(14) Do you own a Canon digital camera? Yes No

If yes, how frequently do you use it?


Not very frequently (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very frequently


(15)How familiar are you with Canon digital cameras?

Not very familiar (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Familiar









3. Subjective Knowledge

Indicate that you agree/disagree the following statements regarding Canon, the camera
brand.

(16) I know a lot about Canon.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


(17)1 know how to evaluate Canon digital camera.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


(18) I think I know enough about Canon digital camera so that I am fairly confident when
making a purchase.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


(19) Among my friends, I am considered the "experts" on Canon digital camera.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


(20) I can tell if the price of a Canon digital camera is justified.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


(21) I can perform problem shooting on Canon digital camera when it is broken.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree


(22) I know where to purchase a good quality Canon digital camera.

Strongly
Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree









Part B. Attitude and Purchase intention
Please view the advertisement, and carefully answer the following questions


The Canon PowerShot SD980 IS Digital ELPH
camera with an ultra-wide 24mm lens.
SyIouI kruo yoju li always get Ithe hir.
usa.canon.comfpowershot


TewerShot
The power is yours


CanonR
imageANYWARE


1, l d,-A oir(ie4n-- 1:011111" i'f- '.I ; h Ino, i Ii, I O M R t-nm koc--.









(A) Please circle the appropriate number that describes

digital camera closely after you view the print Ad.

Strongly Dislike (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Unfavorable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Negative (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)


your attitude toward the Canon


Strongly Like
Favorable
Positive


(B) Please circle the number that best can represents your purchase intentions for a

Canon digital camera closely in the next year.

Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Likely
Definitely would not (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Definitely would
Improbable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Probable










Part B. Attitude and Purchase intention

Please view the advertisement, and carefully answer the following questions


r. GC*o pOl.4r4NSt*2 S s
:r.h ro eS r3 i .orra n;
Wf* k WrV &%T i~ W&i "ru *-a
"fWuk.'OrV.-UT flwftfvli


& o f1i Canon
Thr i5 l W.! imogANHWARf


't i j4eU. NNW UfKlt ies mgmnlti Ikmc riB "iniflu lAI
0% ... ..." ;


r
i; *I?~*lr









(A) Please circle the appropriate number that describes

digital camera closely after you view the print Ad.

Strongly Dislike (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Unfavorable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Negative (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)


your attitude toward the Canon


Strongly Like
Favorable
Positive


(B) Please circle the number that best can represents your purchase intentions for a

Canon digital camera closely in the next year.

Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Likely
Definitely would not (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Definitely would
Improbable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Probable









Part B. Attitude and Purchase intention


Please view the advertisement, and carefully answer the following questions.


The Canon PowerShot S0980 IS Digita ELPH
camera with an ultra-wide 24mm lens.
So you know you'll always ge the snot.
usacanon.com/powershot


towerShot
The power is yours


r eCan on
imageANYWARE









(A) Please circle the appropriate number that describes

digital camera closely after you view the print Ad.

Strongly Dislike (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Unfavorable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Negative (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)


your attitude toward the Canon


Strongly Like
Favorable
Positive


(B) Please circle the number that best can represents your purchase intentions for a

Canon digital camera closely in the next year.

Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Likely
Definitely would not (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Definitely would
Improbable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Probable









LIST OF REFERENCES


Aaker, D. A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity, The Free Press, New York, NY.

Aaker, D. A. (1996), "Measuring brand equity across products and markets", California
Management Review, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 18-21.

Alba, J. W. and Hutchinson, J. W. (1987), "Dimensions of consumer expertise", Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 411-454.

Allport, G. W. (1935), "Attitudes", in C.A. Murchison (Ed.), A Handbook of social
psychology, Clark University Press, New York, NY, pp. 798-844.

Baker, T. L., Hunt, J. B. and Scribner, L. L. (2002), "The effect of introducing a new
brand on consumer perceptions of current brand similarity: the roles of product
knowledge and involvement", Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 10 No. 4,
pp. 45-58.

Bartlett, F. C. (1932), Remembering: A Study In Experimental and Social Psychology,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Belch, G. E. and Michael, A. B. (1994), Introduction to Advertising and Promotion: An
Integrated Marketing Communication Perspective, 3rd ed., Irwin, Homewood, IL, pp.
290-316.

Bettman, J. R. and Park, C. W. (1980), "Effects of prior knowledge and experience and
phase of the choice process on consumer decision processes: a protocol analysis",
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 234-248.

Biswas, A. and Sherrell, D. L. (1993), "The influence of product knowledge and brand
name on internal price standards and confidence", Psychology and Marketing, Vol.
10 No.1, pp. 60-69.

Biswas, D., Biswas, A. and Das, N. (2006), "The differential effects of celebrity and
expert endorsements on consumer risk perceptions", Journal of Advertising, Vol. 35
No. 2, pp. 17-31.

Bradley, S. (1996), "Marketers are always looking for good pitchers", Brandweek,
February 26, pp. 36-37.

Brucks, M. (1985),"The effects of product class knowledge on information search
behavior", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12 No.1, pp.1-16.

Craik, F. I. M. and Lockhart, R. (1972), "Levels of processing: a framework of memory
research", Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, Vol. 11, pp. 671-684.









David Backer (2005, April 14) Canon leads in digital camera sales. Message posted to
http://news.cnet.com/Canon-leads-in-digital-camera-sales/2100-1041 _3-5671205. html

DeBono, K. G., Omoto, A. M. (2001), "Individuals differences in predicting behavioral
intentions from attitude and subjective norm", Journal of Social Psychology Bulletin,
Vol. 133 No. 6, pp. 825-831.

DeBono, K. G., Snyder, M. (1995), "Acting on one's attitudes: the role of a history of
choosing situations", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 21
No. 6, pp. 620-628.

Desai, K. K. and Gencturk, E. (1995), "Schema incongruity: multidimensional
perspective involving advertising schema, self Schema, and product schema",
Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 390-390.

Dimofte, C. V., Forehand, M. R. and Deshpande, R. (2003), "Ad schema incongruity as
elicitor of ethnic self-awareness and differential advertising response", Journal of
Advertising Research, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 7-17.

Eagly, A. H., Mladinic, A. and Otto, S. (1992), "Cognitive and affective basses of
attitudes toward social groups and social policies", Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, Vol, 30 No. 2, pp. 113-137.

Fabrigar, L. R., Petty, R. E., Smith, S. M. and Crites, S. L. (2006), "Understanding
knowledge effects on attitude-behavior consistency: the role of relevance,
complexity, and amount of knowledge", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Vol. 90 No. 4, pp. 556-577.

Fiske, C. A., Luebbehusen, L.A., Miyazaki, A.D. and Urbany, J. E. (1994), "The
relationship between knowledge and search: it depends", Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 43-50.

Fiske, K. T., Kinder, D. R. and Larter, W. M. (1983), "The novice and the expert:
knowledge- based strategies in political cognition", Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 381-400.

Flynn, L. R. and Goldsmith, R. E. (1999), "A short, reliable measure of subjective
knowledge", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 57-66.

Freiden, J. B. (1984), "Advertising spokesperson effects: An examination of endorser
type and gender on two audiences", Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 24, No. 5,
pp. 33-41.

Friedman, H. H. and Friedman, L. (1979), "Endorser effective by product type", Journal
of Advertising Research, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 63-71.









Goldsmith, R. E., Lafferty, B. A. and Newell, S. J. (2000), "The impact of corporate
credibility and celebrity credibility on consumer reaction to advertisements and
brands", Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 43-54.

Gronhaug, K., Hem, L. and Lines, R. (2002), "Exploring the impact of product category
risk and consumer knowledge in brand extensions", Journal of Brand Management,
Vol. 9 No. 6, pp. 463-476.

Gwinner, K. (1997), "A model of image creation and image transfer in event
sponsorship", International Marketing Review, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 145-158.

Gwinner, K. P. and Eaton, J. (1999), "Building brand image through event sponsorship",
Journal of Advertising, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 45-57.

Heerden, N. V., Kuiper, A. K. and Saar, H. M. (2008), "Investigating sport celebrity
endorsement and sport event sponsorship as promotional cues", South Africa Journal
for Research in Sport, Physical Education and Recreation, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 147-165.

Hovland, C. I. and Weiss, W. (1951-1952), "The influence of source credibility on
communication effectiveness", Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 635-650.

Hoyer, W. D. and Brown, S. P. (1990), "Effects of brand awareness on choice for a
common, repeat-purchase product", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 17 No. 2,
pp. 141-148.

Kahle, L. R. and Homer, P. M. (1985), "Physical attractiveness of the celebrity endorser:
a social adaptation perspective", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp.
954-961.

Kamins, M. A. (1990), "An Investigation into the 'Match- up' hypothesis in celebrity
advertising: when beauty may be only skin deep", Journal of Advertising Research,
Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 4-13.

Keller, K. L. (1993), "Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand
equity", Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 1-22.

Kim, Yeung- Jo and Na, June-Hee (2007), "Effects of celebrity athlete endorsement on
attitude towards the product: the role of credibility, attractiveness and the concept of
congruence", International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, Vol. 8 No. 4,
pp. 310-320.

Lee, Jung- Gyo and Thorson, E. (2008), "The Impact of celebrity- product incongruence
on the effectiveness of product endorsement", Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.
48 No. 3, pp.433-449.









Lee, M. (1995), "Effects of schema congruity and involvement on product evaluations",
Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 210-216.

Lynch, J and Schuler, D. (1994), "The matchup effect of spokesperson and product
congruency: A schema theory interpretation", Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 11 No.
5, pp. 417-445.

Maheswaran, D. and Sternthal, B. (1990), "The effects of knowledge, motivation, and
type of message on ad processing and product judgments", Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 66-73.

McCracken, G. (1989), "Who is the celebrity endorser? Culture foundations of the
endorsement process", Journal of Consumer Research, December, Vol.16 No. 3, pp.
310-321.

McGuire, W. J. (1985). "Attitudes and Attitude Change", in G. Lindzey and E. Aronson
(Ed.), A handbook of social psychology, New York, NY: Random House, pp. 233-346.


Meyers-Levy, J. and Tybout, A. M. (1989), "Schema congruity as a basis for product
evaluation", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 39-54.

Misra, S. and Beatty, S. E. (1990),"Celebrity spokesperson and brand congruence: an
assessment of recall affect", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 159-
173.

Mittelstaedt, J. D, Riesz, P. C. and Burns, W. J. (2000), "Why endorsements effective?
Sorting among theories of product and endorser effects", Journal of Current Issues
and Research in Advertising, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 55-66.

Ohanian, R. (1990), "Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity
endorsers' perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness" Journal of
Advertising Research, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 39-52.

Pappu, R., Quester, P. G. and Cooksey, R. W. (2005), "Consumer-based brand equity:
improving the measurement empirical evidence" Journal of Product and Brand
Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 143-154.

Park, C. W., Feick, L. and Mothersbaugh, D. L. (1992), "Consumer knowledge
assessment: How product experience and knowledge of brands, attributes, and
features affects what we think we know", Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 19
No. 3, pp. 193-198.

Peracchio, L. A. and Tybout, A. M. (1996), "The moderating role of prior knowledge in
schema-based product evaluations", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 23 No. 3,
pp. 177-192.










Petty, R. D. (2006), "Hit or Mislead", Marketing Management, Vol. 15 No.5, pp. 44-48.

Petty, R. E., Wegener, D. E. and Fabrigar, L. R. (1997), "Attitudes and attitudes
change", Annul Review of Psychology, Vol. 48, pp. 609-647.

Philippe, A. and Ngobo, Paul-Valentin (1999), "Assessment of consumer knowledge
and its consequences: A multi-component approach", Advances in Consumers
research, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 569-575.

Preister, J. R. Godek, J. and Nayakankuppum, DJ. Park, K. (2004), "Brand congruity
and comparative advertising: when and why comparative advertisements lead to
greater elaboration", Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 1-2, pp. 115-123.

Raju, P. S., Lonial, S. C. and Mangold, W. G. (1995), "Differential effects of subjective
knowledge, objective knowledge and usage expertise on decision making: an
exploratory investigation", Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 153-
180.

Rao, A. R., and Monroe, K. B. (1988), "The moderating effect of prior knowledge in cue
utilization in product evaluations", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp.
253-264.

Roehm, M. L. and Sternthal, B. (2001), "The moderating effect of knowledge and
resources on the persuasive impact of analogies", Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 257-272.

Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E. and McClelland, J. L. (1986), "A general framework for
parallel distributed processing", In Rumelhart, D.E. and McClelland, J.L (Ed.), Parallel
Distributed Processing, Foundations, Bradford, Cambridge, MA.

Rumelhart, D. E., and Ortony, A. (1977), "The representation of knowledge in memory",
in Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge, Anderson, R. C., Spiro, R. J. and
Montague, W. E. (Ed.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.

Schmitt, B. H. and Geus, P. (2006)," Are brands forever? How brand knowledge and
relationships affect current and future purchases", Journal of Product and Brand
Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 98-105.

Seno, D. and Lukas, B. A. (2007), "The equity effect of product endorsement by
celebrities-A conceptual framework from a co-branding perspective", European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41 No. 1-2, pp. 121-134.

Smith, G. (2004), "Brand image transfer through sponsorship: consumer learning
perspective", Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 20, pp. 454-474.









Sujan, M. (1985), "Consumer knowledge: effects on evaluation strategies mediating
consumer judgments", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 31-46.

Tellis, G. J. (2004), "Effective advertising: Understanding when, how, and why
advertising works", Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 180-185.

Till, B. D (1998a), "Using celebrity endorsers effectively: lessons from associative
learning", Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 400-409.

Till, B. D. and Shimp, T. A. (1998b), "Endorsers in advertising: the case of negative
celebrity information", Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 67-82.

Tripp, C., Jensen, T. D and Carson, L. (1994), "The effects of multiple product
endorsements by celebrities on consumers' attitudes and intentions", Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 535-547.

Westover, M. L. and Randle, Q. (2009), "Endorser weight and perceptions of brand
attitude and intent to purchase", Journal of Promotion management, Vol. 15 No. 1-2,
pp. 57-73.









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Wei-Hsuan Yang enrolled in the Department of Advertising in the College of

Journalism and Communications at the University of Florida in August 2008, and

graduated with a Master of Advertising degree in 2010. She received her bachelor's

degree in advertising from the College of Communication at the Ming Chuan University,

Taipei, Taiwan. Her research interests include international advertising and branding.





PAGE 1

1 WILL CONSUMERS LEV EL OF KNOWLEDGE INFLUE N CE THEIR ATTITUDES TOWARD CELEBRITY -ENDORSED PRODCUTS? By WEI -HSUAN YANG A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUI REMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ADVERTISING UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2010

PAGE 2

2 2010 Wei -Hsuan Yang

PAGE 3

3 To my family

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my chair, Dr. Michael Weigold for offering me great advice so that I can successfully complete my thesis and therefore, furthered my understandings in field of advertising. I would also like to express my sincere appreciation to the committee members, Dr. Debbie Treise and Dr. Robyn Goodman, for their patience in constantly providing me with valuable comments. Furthermore, I would like to thank my editor, my older sister, who not only helped me proofread my paper, but also provided helpful suggestions. She gave me courage and strength, which sustained me along this process. I would also like t o acknowledge the contribution from the other editor, Michael Kung, who has worked closely with me in improving this paper. Last but not least, I feel deeply grateful about the supports from all my friends and my classmates, Yang, Liuyi and Lee, Seoungchul Particularly, Miss. Yang has been supporting me through sharing her thoughts when I encounter problems of this thesis. They have played instrumental roles in making my experience with the University of Florida more meaningful and memorable.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF C ONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................... 4 page LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................ 7 LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. 8 ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 11 2 LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................. 14 Endorsement ............................................................................................................... 14 How Do Endorsements Work? ............................................................................ 14 Celebrity Endorsement ........................................................................................ 17 How Does Celebrity Endorsement Work Effectively? ......................................... 17 Schema (Congruity/ Incongruity) Theory ............................................................ 19 Knowledge .................................................................................................................. 22 Brand Knowledge Kellers Customer -Brand Equity Model .............................. 24 Product Knowledge .............................................................................................. 26 Attitude ........................................................................................................................ 28 3 CONCEPTUALIZATION ............................................................................................. 30 Different Levels of Knowledge: Expert/Novice .......................................................... 30 Knowledge Measures ................................................................................................. 31 Congruity ..................................................................................................................... 32 Hypotheses ................................................................................................................. 33 4 METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 34 Experimental Design .................................................................................................. 34 Pretest .................................................................................................................. 34 Second Pretest ..................................................................................................... 35 Stimuli Materials ................................................................................................... 36 Sample and Procedure ........................................................................................ 36 Measures of Knowledge ...................................................................................... 37 Subjective Knowledge.......................................................................................... 37 Usage Experience ................................................................................................ 37 Brand Awareness/Association ............................................................................. 37 Measures of Brand Attitude and Purchase Intention .......................................... 38

PAGE 6

6 5 RESULTS .................................................................................................................... 39 Descriptive Analysis .................................................................................................... 39 Measures .................................................................................................................... 40 Dependent Measures ........................................................................................... 40 Brand Association ................................................................................................ 41 Subjective Knowledge.......................................................................................... 42 Familiarity ............................................................................................................. 42 Test of the Hypotheses ............................................................................................... 43 Experts ................................................................................................................. 44 Novices ................................................................................................................. 45 Additional Findings ............................................................................................... 45 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ........................................................................... 47 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 47 Discussion ................................................................................................................... 48 Experts ................................................................................................................. 48 Novices ................................................................................................................. 49 Congruence .......................................................................................................... 50 Implications ................................................................................................................. 50 Limitations of the Research and Directions for Future Research ............................. 52 APPENDIX A SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ...................................................................................... 55 B SECOND PRE -TEST ................................................................................................. 67 C SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ...................................................................................... 68 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 78 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................................................................................ 84

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 5 -1 Sample demographic characteristics ..................................................................... 39 5 -2 Summary of variables ............................................................................................ 41 5 -3 Simple corre lation among association index score, subjective knowledge index score, and familiarity index score ............................................................... 41 5 -4 Simple correlation among brand association index score, attitude index score, and purchase intention index score. ........................................................... 42 5 -5 Simple correlation among subjective knowledge index score, attitude index score and purchase intention index score. ............................................................ 42 5 -6 Simple correlation among familiarity index score, attitude index score, and purchase intention index score. ............................................................................. 43 5 -7 Between -subject effects, dependent variable: Attitude. ........................................ 44 5 -8 Between -subject effects, dependent variable: Purchase intention. ...................... 44 5 -9 Simple Correlation among awareness inde x score, attitude index score, and purchase intention index score. ............................................................................. 46 5 -10 Simple Correlation among experience index score, attitude index score, and purchase intention index score. ............................................................................. 46

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2 -1 Dimensions of brand awareness ........................................................................... 25 4 -1 Total scores each celebrity receiveved. ................................................................ 35

PAGE 9

9 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida i n Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Advertising WILL CONSUMERS LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE INFLUE N CE THEIR ATTITUDES TOWARD CELEBRITY -ENDORSED PRODUC TS? By Wei -Hsuan Yang August 2010 Chair: Michael F. Weigold Major: Advertising The main purpose of this study was to examine whether consumers knowledge influence s their att itude s and purchase intentions when they confront advertisement s with different degrees of congruity of celebrity endorsed product s The hypotheses were based on schema incongruity theory, a subject that has enjoyed popularity among researchers. Lee and Th orson (2008) stated that consumers evaluate celebrity endorsements more positively in terms of purchase intention when there is moderate incongruity between the endorser and endorsed product. In addition, three knowledge measures, subjective knowledge, fam iliarity, and brand association, were used to measure participants knowledge of a specific endorsed product. One hundred thirty -four students participated in the experiment. The students were randomly assigned to participate under three different conditions. The questionnaire employed contain ed two sections ; the first measured participants knowledge levels and the second measured their attitudes toward the endorsed product. Although the results of this research did not support the hypotheses, the study p rovided evidence that all participants behave favorably under high-congruence

PAGE 10

10 conditions. In addition, it indirectly supported the schema congruity theory used in most previous studies. The results also supported evidence from previous studies that knowle dge plays an important role in consumer behavior (Brucks, 1985; Moore & Lehmann, 1980; Punji & Staelin, 1983).

PAGE 11

11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Researchers have become increasingly interested in examining the effects of knowledge on consumer behaviors (Brucks, 198 5; Moore & Lehmann, 1980; Punji & Staelin, 1983). Brand knowledge, which interacts with internal and external factors, indeed plays an important role in consumers purchasing behaviors. Researchers believe that consumer knowledge is important both to theoretical models of consumers and to marketing practice (Flynn & Goldsmith, 1999, p. 57). Brand knowledge is conceptualized and measured in different ways; that is, researchers have addressed brand knowledge using different dimensions. For example, Bettman and Park (1980) measured familiarity and past experience, while Keller (1993) developed a custom based brand equity model that contained two different types of brand knowledge: brand awareness and brand image. Park et al. (1992) defined consumer knowledge via two dimensions: actual knowledge (AK) and self assessed knowledge (SAK). Philippe and Ngobos (1999) two dimensions (familiarity and product knowledge) of consumer knowledge tested the differences between consumers with high versus low levels of brand knowledge. This researcher used Brucks (1985) measurements for objective knowledge, subjective knowledge, and prior experience. These measurements have been widely adopted and are highly regarded among researchers who study consumer decision making. The measurements have also been used to examine the effects of information search, perceived decision outcomes, and attribute importance (Raju et al., 1995). Additionally, Brucks (1985) product class knowledge classification is more detailed than other measurements.

PAGE 12

12 Subjective knowledge is defined as an individuals perception of how much s/he knows, while objective knowledge is defined as the amount, type, or organization of what an individual actually has stored in memory (Brucks, 1985, p. 1). Brucks ( 1985) also stated that experience-based measure gauges the amount of purchasing or user experience with the product (p. 1). In addition to Brucks measurements, this research used concepts of Kellers (1993) brand equity to measure consumers brand awareness because Brucks measurement does not assess whether consumers brand knowledge influences their attitudes and purchase intentions toward endorsed products and celebrity endorsers. Keller (1993) considered attributes, benefits, and brand attitudes as i mportant determinants of consumers purchase decisions; he said that brand associations can be influenced when a brand becomes linked with a celebrity through an endorsement or when it is linked with a sporting event through sponsorship activities (Kelle r, 1993, p. 10). To sum up, this study used two researchers measurements to gauge consumers brand knowledge. Though brand knowledge is considered important to the marketplace, some marketers are unsure how brand knowledge fits into different marketing plans. To draw consumers attention amid all the advertising clutter, marketers try to differentiate their product from those of their competitors. Celebrity endorsement is considered effective in achieving this goal. Marketing practitioners spend a lot of money each year on endorsers for advertising campaigns (Mittelstaedt et al., 2000). In the past, researchers applied different theories to evaluate the effectiveness of celebrity endorsement, including image transfer (McCracken, 1989), schema theory (Misra & Beatty, 1990; Lynch & Schuler, 1994), associative network (Martindale, 1991), and the filtering model

PAGE 13

13 (Taylor & Crocker, 1981). These theories address the connection between celebrity endorsers and their endorsed products. Moreover, most researchers hav e primarily focused on the physical attractiveness and expertise of celebrity endorsers, in addition to congruity issues. For example, the congruity between celebrity endorser and endorsed product has been widely studied to examine whether the level of credibility increases when endorsers and their endorsed products are congruent. However, few studies have considered such factors as consumers knowledge. This thesis is an examination of the relationships between consumers brand/product knowledge and celebrity endorsements. Do consumers with different levels of knowledge respond differently to celebrity endorsements? Will consumers brand/product knowledge influence their responses to different levels of product congruity and celebrity endorser? Answerin g these questions could help marketers decide whether an endorsement is appropriate for situations with different levels of consumer involvement. This research used a high technology oriented product to serve as an experimental object. Chang and Mendonca (2004) studied how different product types may affect consumer cognition and browsing behavior. They categorized a digital camera in the highprice/high-involvement section because consumers perform research, including reading customer reviews, product des criptions, and product features and exploring the product category based on their schema, before making purchase decisions (Chang & Mendonnca, 2004). Additionally, Roehm and Sternthal said that highly knowledgeable consumers may exhibit a tendency to delv e into the details of the message, especially for high technology oriented products (2000, p. 261)

PAGE 14

14 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Endorsement During past years, millions of dollars have been spent annually on celebrity endorsement contracts on the premise that source effects play an important role in persuasive communications (Tripp et al., 1994, p. 535). Many researchers have studied the effectiveness of these endorsements (Biswas et al., 2006; Friedman & Friedman, 1979; Goldsmith et al., 2000; Gwinner & Eaton, 1999; Kim & Na, 2007; Lee & Thorson, 2008; Lynch & Schuler, 1994; McCracken, 1989; Misra & Beatty, 1990; Till & Shimp, 1998b). Some have stated that endorsement is an effective marketing tool, while others have argued that it is risky, especially celebrity endorsement (Till & Shimp, 1998b). Tellis (2004) categorized endorsements into three categories: expert, celebrity, and lay endorsments. Biswas and Das (2006) also broke down endorsement into three types: expert endorsement, celebrity endorsement, and non-celebrity nonexpert endorsement. Tellis (2004) and Biswas and Das (2006) defined these three categories similarly: Experts are individuals or organizations that the target population perceives as having specialized knowledge in a particular area, celebrities are individuals who are well known to the population because of the publicity associated with their lives, and lay endorsers are defined as initially unknown or fictitious individuals or characters used as a spokesperson in an ad (Tellis, 2004, p. 180). How Do E n dorsements W ork? The process of endorsement is complex and involves the interaction of source, product, message, and situational factors (Mittelstaedt et al 2000). Endorsement has been widely considered an effective marketing tool to enhance consumers awareness,

PAGE 15

1 5 improve consumers memory, and reinforce the image of endorsed products. When it comes to what makes endorsement work effectively, researchers have developed different theories: image transfer (McCracken, 1989), source c redibility model (Hovland & Weiss, 1951 1952), and source attractiveness model (McGuire, 1985). Image t ransfer takes place as a result of a number of marketing related activities (Smith, 2004, p. 458). The image transfer model illustrates the process of how meanings are passed from celebrity to product and then from product to consumer (Smith, 2004). McCracken (1989) suggested that the effectiveness of an endorser depends, in part, on the meanings he or she brings to the endorsement process (p. 315). G winner (1997) noted that when celebrity endorser and endorsed product are paired in an advertisement, the meaning of the celebrity moves to the product; that is, meanings associated with the celebrity would become associated with the product in the mind o f the consumer (as cited in McCracken, 1989, p. 147). The transfer process is completed when a consumer acquires/consumes the product, thus transferring the meaning to the user (Gwinner & Eaton, 1999, p. 48). The source credibility model (Hovland model ) suggested that the effectiveness of message depended on the expertness and trustworthiness of the source (McCracken, 1989, p. 310). Goldsmith et al (2000) stated that credibility is defined as the extent to which the source is perceived as posses sing expertise relevant to the topic of the communication and can be trusted to give an objective opinion on the subject (as cited i n Belch & Belch, 1994; Ohanian, 1990, p. 43). These two dimensions, expertise and trustworthiness, of the s ource c redibilit y model have been considered crucial in conceptualizing credibility and persuading consumers (Goldsmith et al 2000).

PAGE 16

16 Tellis (2004) argued that the central premise of Source Credibility theory was that the acceptance of a message depends on the sources quality. Expertness and trustworthiness are two key qualities that, if present to a sufficient degree, will lead the audience to accept and internalize the message communicated (Tellis, 2004, p. 181). McCracken (1989) defined expertness as the perceived ability of the source to make valid assertions and trustworthiness as the perceived willingness of the source to make valid assertions (p. 311). The s ource a ttractive ness model (McGuire m odel) asserts that the effectiveness of a message depends on the s imilarity, familiarity and liking of an endorser (Kim & Na, 2007, p. 311). McCracken (1989) defined familiarity as knowledge of the source through exposure, likability as affection for the source as a result of the sources physical appearance and behavi or and similarity as the resemblance between the source and receiver of the message (p. 311). Kahle and Homer (1985) found that physically attractive celebrity endorsers when endorsing beauty enhancing products, generate a positive effect on consumers brand attitudes, purchase intentions, brand recall, and recall of advertisement related issues. Tellis (2004) posited that the reason the source attractiveness model (McGuire m odel) is effective is conditioning. He defined conditioning as a process by whic h effect or response to a particular source is transferred to a target by the regular association of the two stimuli ( Tellis, 2000, p.183). Each of the theories has been expanded upon by many researchers with different perspectives and from different fiel ds. Most researchers have focused on one type of endorsement (expert, celebrity, or lay) and evaluated its effectiveness. The majority believe s that celebrity endorsement is effective in dimensions such as trustworthiness,

PAGE 17

17 believability, persuasiveness, a nd likability (Biswas et al 2006; Freiden, 1984; Friedman & Friedman, 1979; Till & Shimp, 1998b). If the goal is to elicit awareness of the product, then a celebrity would probably work best (Freiden, 1984, p. 40). Celebrity Endorsement Celebrity endorsement is widely used in advertisements to improve the effects of persuasive communication (Heerden et al., 2008). McCracken (1989, p. 310) classified celebrity advertisements into four types: explicit, implicit, imperative, and copresent modes. I endo rse the product is an example of the explicit mode, I use this product is an example of the implicit mode, You should use this product is an example of the imperative mode, and the copresent mode is exemplified by ads in which the celebrity merely ap pears with the product. McCracken (1989) further defined a celebrity endorser as any individual who enjoys public recognition and who uses this recognition on behalf of a consumer good by appearing with it in an advertisement (p. 310). Seno and Lukas (2 007) defined the image of a celebrity as the perceptions about an individual who enjoys public recognition as reflected by the celebrity associations held in consumer memory (p. 122). How Do es Celebrity Endorsement Work E ffectively? As discussed above, celebrity endorsement is considered the most effective endorsement among all types of endorsements; it is commonly used in advertisements to improve the effectiveness of persuasive communication (Kim & Na, 2007). For example, compared to non-celebrity en dorsements, the use of celebrity endorsement is considered more interesting, stronger, and more effective in beer commercials. Additionally, the use of celebrity endorsers is believed to improve the endorsed brands reception (Heerden et al., 2008).

PAGE 18

18 Researchers have developed different theories to evaluate the effectiveness of celebrity endorsement, including the associative network model (Craik & Lockhart, 1972), the matchup hypothesis (Kahle & Hommer, 1985), and the schema congruity theory (Lynch & Schuler, 1994; Kamins, 1990).These theories have been widely used in celebrity endorsement -related studies in the past. The associative network model has been used to support the conceptualization of transfer in celebrity endorsements (Till & Shimp, 199 8b) and explains how the memory of brands is activated when allied together to produce transfer (Smith, 2004, p. 460). Misra and Beaty (1990) stated that information not consistent with an individuals schema may be quite significant and informative and, therefore, be attended to more closely and be processed more deeply (p. 162). Till (1998a) stated that the key aspects of this model include a set of processing units (nodes), a state of activity, a pattern of connectivity among units, and a learning r ule that allows patterns of connectivity to be modified based on experience (as cited in Rumelhart et al.,1986, p. 401). In the marketplace, consumers may possess a greater association set for a certain celebrity than for a certain brand; in that case th inking of the brand is more likely to activate the celebrity node than thinking about the celebrity is to activate the brand node (Till & Shimp, 1998b, p. 69). The match -up hypothesis implies that highly relevant characteristics of the spokesperson are c onsistent with the highly relevant attributes of the brand (Misra & Beaty, 1990, p. 161). Kamins (1990, p. 4) suggested that the matchup hypothesis implies that the physical attractiveness of a celebrity endorser may only enhance both product and adbas ed evaluations if the products characteristics match up with the

PAGE 19

19 image conveyed by the celebrity. The results of match -up experiments suggest that this hypothesis is likely to generate better recall and brand information (Misra & Beaty, 1990). Addition ally, if consumers perceive a strong relationship between the persona of the endorser and the brand name of the product, the endorsers are effective (Misra & Beaty, 1990, p. 160). Schema (Congruity/ I ncongruity) T heory One explanation that supports the effectiveness of the match -up theory is the schema theory (Lynch & Schuler, 1994; Gwinner & Eaton, 1999; Misra & Beaty, 1990). Gwinner and Eaton (1999) noted that schema theory is based on research which found that memory is not a verbatim account of pas t experiences, but rather a blend of both specific memories and general abstractions about types of people, activities, and objects (as cited in Bartlett, 1932; Runelhart & Ortony, 1977, p. 49). Schema theory implies that consumers have preconceived opin ions of both the brands involved in the sponsorship and the categories to which these brands belong (Smith, 2004, p. 460). In addition, consumers use these schemas to judge the brands matchup (Smith, 2004, P.460). Smith (2004) further suggested that s chema theory is used to explain how the categories from which the brands come affects the way memory is activated and matchup occurs (p. 460). It represents a system that lets people function in a complicated environment (Gwinner & Eaton, 1999). Kim and Na (2007) conducted two experiments to evaluate the fit between endorsers and endorsed products and how it influenced attitudes toward the endorsed products. They demonstrated that when a celebrity endorser and endorsed product have a good fit, consumers evaluate an endorsed product more favorably. Schema theory is a useful framework to examine why the match and mismatch conditions illustrated in the literature might have influenced

PAGE 20

20 consumers reactions toward brands, spokespersons, and an attractiveness -r elated product (Lynch & Schuler, 1994). Misra and Beatty (1990) concluded that when a congruent relationship exists between spokesperson and brand, consumers recall information about the brand more easily. Lynch and Schuler (1994) used schema theory to i nterpret previous inquiries into the matchup hypothesis. They examined the match up hypothesis and found that the congruence in advertisements between celebrity endorsers characteristics and endorsed product attributes was connected to observed variations in source credibility and other advertising measures. Moreover, they used schema theory to develop experiments to demonstrate how the spokesperson/product match could change the schema. It has been stated that the integration between the matched or credibility concept with the spokesperson schema is related to Kamins (1990) conclusion that an attractive endorser and attractiveness -related product match may enhance the credibility of the endorser (Lynch & Schuler, 1994). Additionally, the results of the match-up may generate a new schema and new information. Lynch and Schuler (1994) found that there was no change occurring between the product schema at the time of exposure and the subsequent schema of the product/brand as affected by that exposure (p. 425). This is because the concept of attractive already exists in the product schema, and the attractiveness attractiveness match develops no new information. Kamins (1990) findings were also consistent with Lynch and Schulers (1994) interpretation, wh ich found that no significant differences in brand evaluations related to the match/no-match

PAGE 21

21 treatments. This is not to say that the brand schema in this instance is likely to be entirely unchanged (Lynch & Schuler, 1994, p. 425). Even though many res earchers have stated that congruence between endorser and endorsed product will lead to more favorable attitudes toward the product, some researchers think that moderate incongruity may draw more of the consumers attention to the product than extreme congruity or extreme incongruity. Meyers -Levy and Tybout (1989, p. 51) concluded that moderate schema incongruity resulted in more favorable evaluations than schema congruity or extreme schema incongruity. Lee and Thorsons (2008) research revealed that cons umers evaluate celebrity endorsements more positively in terms of purchase intention when there is moderate incongruity between the endorser and endorsed product. Dimofte et al. (2003, p. 9) explained that consumers would generate favorable attitudes towar d inconsistent information because a clear distinction must be made between information that is incongruent with extant product attitudes versus extant advertisement schema. Schema incongruity was thought to be important to marketers because the degree to which information is discrepant from schema expectations can affect a number of consumer judgments such as product evaluation and product ratings (Desai & Gencturk, 1995, p. 39). Lee (1995) concluded that when consumers evaluate products, they engage in different types of information processing because the procedure depends on product schema congruity and involvement. Lee (1995) further explained that when consumers think the information is congruent, they make less effort to evaluate it. Even if they think the information does not match, they do not use a piecemeal process unless something/someone requires them to do so. According to Lee (1995, p. 214), [i]t is only

PAGE 22

22 when the information is incongruent with the category schema and they are highly invo lved with the evaluation situation that they engage in attribute-based piecemeal processing. Peracchio and Tybout (1996, p. 179) stated that consumers with elaborated knowledge will moderate how an activated schema affects product evaluations. Prior re search has focused on the relationships between a brand and a product category. This study took it a step further to address the relationships between celebrity endorser and endorsed products and hypothesized that a similar process occurs between them. Th erefore, this study suggested that the congruity that exists between celebrity endorsers and their endorsed products will influence attitude and purchase intention (Priester et al., 2004). This study was intended to measure participants knowledge, purchas e intention, and attitudes to examine whether consumers with high brand knowledge influence the effectiveness of celebrity endorsement; we also investigated whether consumers with different levels of knowledge involved in different levels of congruity betw een celebrity endorsers and endorsed products generate different attitudes and purchase intentions toward the endorsed products. Knowledge Consumer knowledge has been investigated by many researchers (Baker et al., 2002; Brucks, 1985; Flynn & Goldsmith, 1 999; Gronhaug et al., 2002; Keller, 1993; Pappu et al., 2005; Park et al., 1992; Philippe & Ngobo, 1999; Raju et al., 1995; Schmitt & Geus, 2006). Some researchers (Gronhaung et al., 2002; Brucks, 1985) measured consumers knowledge to examine the influenc e of their abilities to search information,

PAGE 23

23 and some discussed the roles of knowledge and involvement (Baker et al., 2002) or extended the previous measurement (Philippe & Ngobo, 1999). The definitions and measurements of knowledge vary; Keller (1993) def ined brand knowledge as having two dimensions, brand awareness and brand image; Philippe and Ngobo (1999) pointed out two major dimensions of knowledge: familiarity and product knowledge; Brucks (1985) described three categories of consumer knowledge (subj ect knowledge, object knowledge, and prior experience); Park et al. (1992) defined knowledge as having two dimensions: actual knowledge (AK) and self -assessed knowledge (SAK). Philippe and Ngobo (1999) said that knowledge is a multidimensional construct b ecause there are different types of knowledge (e.g., objective vs. subjective, brand vs. product type knowledge) (p. 569). Philippe and Ngobo (1999) reexamined the previous knowledge assessment issues and used wine as an experimental object to measure consumers familiarity and product knowledge. They concluded that there are four elements of knowledge: familiarity, objective product category information, objective expertise, and subjective expertise. The conclusions were consistent with previous studies t hat suggested knowledge is a multidimensional construct. Familiarity was defined as behavioral content of knowledge with two dimensions: depth and breadth. Product knowledge is composed of two components: product class information and expertise (Philippe & Ngobo, 1999). Park et al. (1992) examined how product expertise and knowledge of brands, attributes, and features affected consumers thoughts. They discussed the relationships between the two constructs of knowledge: actual knowledge and self assessed

PAGE 24

24 knowledge. AK was considered an objective measure of factual memory content and SAK was considered a perceptual measure of memory content. AK may provide raw material for problem solving, and lead to increased efficiency in search, and, hence better a ccuracy in problem solving; SAK may provide the motivation to search for and process task -relevant information (Park et al., 1992, p. 193). Brand Knowledge Kellers Customer Brand Equity M odel It is crucial to understand the content and structure of bran d knowledge because they affect what comes to mind when a consumer thinks about a brand (Keller, 1993, p. 2). Schmitt and Geus (2006) created a conceptual model that indicated how three variables perception, cognition, and relationship are consistent and how they mutually affect current and future purchase intentions. They said brand knowledge variables assess how customers perceive and evaluate brands (Schmitt & Geus, 2006, p. 98). Keller (1993) conceptualized brand knowledge according to an associati ve network memory model in terms of two components, brand awareness and brand image (p. 1). Brand awareness is considered consistent with brand recall and consumers recognition performance; it is defined as how easy it is for the consumer to remember th e brand (Schmitt & Geus, 2006, p. 99). Pappu et al. (2005) also said that brand awareness consisted of both brand recognition and brand recall (as cited in Keller, 1993, p. 145). Aaker (1996) suggested different brand equity based on Kellers (1993) customer brand equity. He structured brand equity in four dimensions: loyalty, perceived quality, associations, and awareness. Loyalty was defined as the attachment that a customer has to a brand; perceived quality was defined as quality that provided val ue to consumers by giving them a reason to buy and by differentiating the brand from

PAGE 25

25 competing brands (Pappu et al., 2005, p. 145). Associations were defined as involving image dimensions that are unique to a product class or brand (as cited in Aaker, 1991). Aaker (1996) stated that brand awareness can influence perceptions and attitudes. Additionally, it also reflects the salience of the brand in the customers mind (Aaker, 1996, p. 144). Six levels of awareness have been identified: recognition, rec all, topof mind, brand dominance, brand knowledge, and brand opinion (Aaker, 1996, p. 144). Figure 2 1. Dimensions of brand awareness Figure 2.1 was modified based on Kellers (1993) summary of dimensions brand knowledge. Brand awareness includes tw o primary components, brand recall and brand recognition (p. 3). Brand recognition involves consumers abilities to recall previous experience with the brand when the brand is presented. Consumers need to accurately indicate whether they have seen or heard of the brands presented. In contrast, brand recall involves customers abilities to relate to the brand when presented with a product category. Customers need to accurately identify the brand from their memory (Keller, 1993). Brand image is considered a set of associations connected to the brand that consumers store in memory (Keller, 1993). Brand associations fall into four categories:

PAGE 26

26 types of brand association, favorability of brand associations, strength of brand association, and uniqueness of bra nd association (p. 3). Types of brand association are further classified into three categories: attributes, benefits, and attitudes. Attributes are descriptive features that characterize a product or service (Keller, 1993, p. 4). Thus, attributes are related to what consumers think about the product or service. Brand attribute consists of two components: product -related attributes and nonproduct related attributes. Benefits are the personal value consumers attach to the product or service (Keller, 1993, p. 4); they are related to what consumers believe the product or service can do for them. Benefits consist of functional, experiential, and symbolic benefits. Attitudes are considered the basis of consumerism and are defined as consumers overall evalu ations of a brand (Keller, 1993, p. 4). According to Keller (1993, p. 8), high levels of brand awareness and a positive brand image should increase the probability of a brand choice, and lead to greater consumer loyalty and decrease vulnerability. In ad dition, perceptual and cognitive models suggest that brand knowledge influences consumers responses to the brand (Schmitt & Geus, 2006). Schmitt and Geus (2006) further stated that current behavior refers to the brand purchase and its usage; future behavi or refers to purchase intention toward a brand. This research used concepts from Kellers customer -brand equity model, that is, the measure of brand awareness and brand image. Product K nowledge As mentioned before, Philippe and Ngobo (2006) classified consumer knowledge into product (class) knowledge and product familiarity. Baker et al. (2002) stated that product knowledge is a complex, multidimensional construct that is characterized by

PAGE 27

27 the structure and the content of information stored in memory (as cited in Alba & Hutchinson, 1987, p. 47). Product knowledge is considered an important factor in the research on consumer decision making (Raju et al., 1995). Flynn and Goldsmith (1999, p. 57) stated that there are three distinct but related ways in whic h consumer knowledge is conceptualized and measured: objective knowledge, subjective knowledge, and experience. Researchers have divided product class knowledge into three categories. The first measures an individuals perception of how much s/he knows. The second measures the amount, type, or organization of what an individual actually has stored in memory. The third category measures the amount of purchasing or user experience with the product (Brucks, 1985, p. 1); product knowledge plays an important role in the consumer decisionmaking process (Raju et al., 1995, p. 155). Biswas and Sherrell (1993) stated that product knowledge includes information about the functional attributes of the product class and how such attributes contribute to brand differences. They further defined an expert as an individual whose perception of his overall product knowledge is high and a novice as an individual whose perception of his overall product knowledge is low (Biswas & Sherrell, 1993, p. 34). Maheswaran and Ster nthal (1990) noted that a technical attribute focus is likely to be effective because experts are able to infer all of the related benefits and find technical description to be more convincing (as cited in Alba & Hutchinson, 1987, p. 67). The consumers with high levels of objective knowledge may be more discriminating about certain attributes (Raju et al., 1995, p. 158). Novices tend to focus on consistent information while experts tend to infer, recall, and describe the inconsistent situation (Fiske et al., 1983). Fiske et al. (1983) further stated that experts may consider more inconsistent

PAGE 28

28 information than novices when they are deciding among materials that contain both inconsistent and consistent information. Expert consumers are also thought to be m ore easily influenced by the match or mismatch of information to category knowledge than novice consumers (Sujan, 1985). Petty et al. (1997, p. 632) stated that prior knowledge can both foster thinking about a message and help people bolster initial opinions. Low -familiar consumers tend to use extrinsic cues, such as price, to evaluate a product because there is little intrinsic product information stored in their memories; this causes consumers to develop incomplete schema, which makes processing intrinsic information more difficult (Rao & Monroe, 1988). Attitude Attitude has been defined in a variety of ways, but can generally be considered as an evaluation or judgment of an object in question as positive, negative or somewhere in between (Petty et al, 1997). Petty et al (1997) stated that conceptualizing attitudes as having affective (emotional) and cognitive (belied) bases has been one of the most popular means of classifying the different types of information upon which attitudes are based (Petty et al, 1997, p.613). The main issue of attitude theory is the relation between attitudes and the experience that underlies them (Eaglyet al, 1994, p.113) O ne commonly discussed hypothesis states that attitudes are referred to the evaluations of attitude objects, develop from peoples cognitions, that i s, from the ideas that people f o r m about the attitude objects (Eagly et al, 1994). Past researchers usually used closeended questionnaires to measure subjects cognitions and affect ion. While some researchers (Eagly et al, 1994) chose a dif ferent way (openended), there is no confirmation whether this is an improvement over the traditional close ended measures.

PAGE 29

29 In addition, Debono and Omoto (2001) and Allport (1935) noted that the concept of attitude was believed to influence behaviors. Petty et al (1997) stated that ones history of choosing attitude -relevant situations predicted willingness to engage in future behavior more for low than high self -monitors (as cited in Debono and Snyders 1995, p.635). Fabrigar et al (2006) stated that conceptualization of knowledge shows that the greater knowledge will enhance attitude-behavior consistency. The present experimental demonstrations of effects for knowledge provide some of the strongest evidence to date that knowledge plays an important role in attitude behavior consistency (Fabrigar et al, 2006, p.574).

PAGE 30

30 CHAPTER 3 C ONCEPTUALIZATION Extending from previous theories, this study proposes a hypothesized model that incorporates the variables of expert / novic e and high, medium and low levels of congruity. Constructs in this model are the subjects level of knowledge, levels of congruity, attitude toward the endorsed product and purchase intention. Different L evels of K nowledge: Expert /Novice Alba and Hutc hinson (1987) described experts as those who have base knowledge structures that is richly endowed with attribute information as well as abstract information about structural relations, and novices a s being likely to have knowledge structure that may include some attribute information but relatively little abstract inform ation about underlying concepts (p. 259) (as cited in Roehm & Sternthal, 1997). Consumers will compare their perceptions of the characteristics of a celebrity endorser with the percei ved advertised benefits of the endorsed products to determine the fit between the celebrity and the product ( Misra & Beaty, 1990). Novices tend to focus on consistent information while experts tend to infer, recall, and describe inconsistent conditions (Fiske et al 1983). According to Fiske et al experts may also consider inconsistent information more than novices do when they are making a decision involving a product with a match that is either highly inconsistent or highly consistent C onsumer expert s are more likely to be influence d by a marked match or mismatch than are novice consumers (Sujan, 1985)

PAGE 31

31 Knowledge M easures Philippe and Ngobo (2006) stated that consumer knowledge include s two dimensions product knowledge and familiarity where p roduc t knowledge i s measured in terms of subjective knowledge, objective knowledge and experience, and familiarity is described as a behavior component of knowledge (p.569) Brucks (1985) observed that the subjective knowledge measures an individuals perc eption of how much s/he knows, objective knowledge measures the amount, type, or organization of what an individual actually stores in memory, and experience measures the amount of purchasing or usage experience with the product (p.1). Keller (1993) conceptualized brand knowledge according to an associative network memory model which consists of two components, brand awareness and brand image (p.1). Brand awareness is consistent with brand recall and consumers recognition performance such that brand awareness can be measured by how easy it is for the consumer to remember the brand ( Schmitt & Geus, 2006, p. 99). Keller (1993) defined brand image as the set of associations connected to a brand that consumers store in memory. Aaker (1996) measured this association on four different levels perceived value, personality, organization and differentiation and suggested that brand associations could provide value to the consumers by providing a reason for consumers to buy a product and by creating positive attitudes/feelings among consumers (Aaker, 1991, p.145). T h e current s tudy used three knowledge measures familiarity, subjective knowledge and brand associationto measure subjects knowledge. Objective knowledge is excluded because of the difficult y in measur ing it; previous studies have

PAGE 32

32 focused on the product category instead of a specific brand, resulting in the absence of accurate and proven criteria usable for measuring objective knowledge Congruity Meyers Levy and Tybout (1989) defined congruity a s a match betwe en the attributes of an object/ product and a relevant schema, whereas incongruity involves some form of mismatch (p 41). Lee and Thorson (2008) suggested that incongruity occurs when the image of celebrity is inconsistent with the endorsed product such that a clear link between them is absent. Lee (1995) contended that consumers engage in processing different types of information when they evaluat e products because the procedure depends on product schema congruity and involvement. W hen th e information is considered congruent, consumers make less effort to go through the information. Lee and Thorson (2008) revealed that consumers evaluated celebrity endorsements more positively in terms of purchase intention when there was a moderate incongruity between the endorser and endorsed product and concluded that participants with higher degrees of product involvement were more likely to be influenced by the impact of celebrity product congruence. In other words, compared to participants with low pr oduct involvement, those with higher product involvement tend to exert more cognitive efforts to understand the association between celebrity endorsers and their endorsed products. In addition, Alba et al. (1987) found that schema-inconsistent facts are re called more accurately than schema-consistent ones. As a result, if a products features are inconsistent with a consumers expectations for the product or its class the consumer should easily recall those features especially if the consumer is an expert

PAGE 33

33 Hypothes e s Meyers Levy and Tybout (1989) and Lee and Thorson (2008) found that consumers evaluated celebrity endorsements more positively in terms of purchase intention when there was a moderate incongruity between the endorsers and their endorsed products. However, Fiske et al. (1983) found that novices tend to focus on consistent information, while experts are able to infer, recall, and describe inconsistent situations to a larger extent than consistent situations Therefore, we form the following hyp otheses: H1. Experts generate more positive attitudes toward moderately incongruous endorsed products than toward highly congruous or highly incongruous endorsed products. H2. Experts generate greater purchase intentions toward moderately incongruous end orsed products than toward highly congruous or highly incongruous endorsed products. H3. Novices generate more positive attitude s toward highly congruous endorsed product s than toward moderately incongruous or highly incongruous endorsed products. H4. N ovices generate greater purchase intentions toward highly congruous endorsed product s than toward moderately incongruous or highly incongruous endorsed products.

PAGE 34

34 CHAPTER 4 METHODOLOGY Experimental D esign The purpose of this study was to understand whet her consumers different levels of knowledge influence their attitudes toward celebrity endorsed products; therefore, 2 (expert, novice) X 3 (high congruity, moderate incongruity, high incongruity) factorial experiments were applied in the study. Pretest The purpose of this pretest was to establish the celebrity endorsers for the experiment. Thirty students took the pretest at the University of Florida during the spring semester of 2010. They were asked to evaluate their familiarity with the endorsed product, a Canon branded digital camera, and then to rate each celebrity according to how appropriate they thought the endorser was for the specific endorsed product. Some celebrities from Lee and Thorsons (2008) pretest were used. Ten celebrities were sele cted based on five criteria: high ratings on the match-up factor, salience, high familiarity, little recall of the prior endorsement, and overall favorableness (p. 437). Because this pretest focused on college students, two celebrities were removed from the list and then eight additional celebrities were added based on their popularity. The participants were simultaneously presented with a picture of Canons digital camera and pictures of the celebrities. Assuming the celebrities endorsed Canons digital camera, the participants then evaluated the level of congruity between the camera and the celebrities. This study used the scales from Lee and Thorsons (2008) pretest, which include six 7 -point bipolar items: very appropriate/very inappropriate, very consistent/inconsistent, very likely/very unlikely, very relevant/ irrelevant matches very

PAGE 35

35 well/does not match, and goes together/does not go together (Lee & Thorson, 2008, p. 438). The results of this pretest were used to classify the three celebrity endors ers into high congruity, moderate incongruity, and high incongruity, depending on the total scores. Following the pretest, the print ads were simulated featuring the celebrity subjects chosen from the pretest. Celebrity Jessica Alba received the highest s cores in this pretest, while Bob Dole received the lowest (see Figure 4.1). The SPSS system was used to examine the reliability of the scale. The alpha score was 0.96; this indicated that the scale had high internal consistency (reliability). Figure 4 1 Total scores each celebrity receiveved. Second P retest The purpose of the second pretest was to make sure that participants were familiar with the celebrities presented in the first pretest. Fifteen students participated in the second pretest. They wer e asked to write down the name of each celebrity they could recall. They were told to write DK, which stands for dont know, for celebrities whose name they did not know. The results of the pretest showed the level of familiarity

PAGE 36

36 by celebrity. The level of familiarity of Sally Field, Bob Dole, Maria Sharapova, and Kiefer Sutherland was below 80%; therefore, these four celebrities were eliminated from the celebrity list. The remaining celebrities were Jessica Alba, Cameron Diaz, Merryl Streep, Jack Black Ben Affleck, and Avril Lavigne. Jessica Alba, Ben Affleck, and Avril Lavigne were then classified into high congruity, moderate incongruity, and high incongruity, respectively, based on the scores they received in the first pretest. Stimuli M aterials T he stimuli were simulated print advertisements. The advertisements featured a Canon digital camera (SD 980 IS Digital ELPH) paired with different celebrity endorsers selected from the pretest. This study used similar content for all three advertisements t o minimize the influence of factors other than the endorsers. Each advertisement included one slogan and a brief description of the Canon digital camera. Sample and Procedure The participants were students from the University of Florida. Gender was not co nsidered and participants ages ranged from 18 years old to 34 years old. At the beginning of the experiment, the researcher assured participants that their personal information and responses would be confidential and anonymous. They received a questionnaire and were asked to read the first page of the instructions. The questionnaire contained two sections; the first measured the participants levels of knowledge, and the second measured their attitudes toward the endorsed product (see Appendix B). One hu ndred thirty -four students participated in the experiment. They were randomly assigned to different situations (high congruity, moderate congruity, high incongruity). After participants answered the knowledge measuring questions in the first section, they were presented with different print ads.

PAGE 37

37 A total of 18 questions (association: 10; subjective knowledge: 7; familiarity: 1) were used to measure participants knowledge. M easures of K nowledge This research relied on Brucks (1985) product class knowledge and part of Aakers (1996) awareness and association to measure participants recall, recognition, perceived value, personality, differentiation, and organizational associations of the brand. Subjective K nowledge This study used a format based on Fl ynn and Goldsmiths (1999) definition to measure subjective knowledge. They defined subjective knowledge as a consumers perception of the amount of information they have stored in their memory (Flynn & Goldsmith, 1999, p. 59). They further developed sev en statements based on self assessments of the product and used a 7-point Likert scale to record answers. Some of questions were reversed or shared the same meanings; therefore, this research used the seven original questions. Usage E xperience This r esearcher applied Bettman and Parks (1980) measurements, asking participants whether they had ever searched for information on, used, or owned a digital camera. Brand Awareness/A ssociation This part involved a modification of Aakers (1996) measurement to examine how well participants recalled and recognized a specific brand (topof -mind awareness and brandopinion awareness). Participants answered two openended questions: List all brands of digital camera which you can recall.

PAGE 38

38 What is your favorite digital camera? Moreover, they were provided with 10 questions modified from Aakers measurement. These questions included four dimensions: perceived value, personality, organization, and differentiation. Measures of B rand Attitude and Purchase I ntent ion This study used Westover and Randles (2009) measurements to measure participants brand attitudes and purchase intentions. Participants answered three attitude relevant questions using a 7 -point semantic differential scale (strongly like/strongly dislike, positive/negative, favorable/unfavorable) and three questions related to purchase intention using a 7point semantic differential scale (unlikely/likely, definitely would not/definitely would, improbable/probable).

PAGE 39

39 CHAPTER 5 RESULTS Descriptive Analysis Among the 134 survey participants, 49 (36.6%) were male, and 85 (63.4%) were female. Their ages ranged from 18 to 34; the mean age was 22.6 (see Table1). Of the participants, 73 (54.5%) were Caucasian, 11 (8.2%) were African American, 33 (24.6%) w ere Asian, 13 (9.7%) were Latino, 4 (3%) were anther ethnicity (see Table 5 -1). Table 5 1. Sample demographic characteristics Characteristic N Gender Male 49 Female 85 Age 18 25 108 26 30 19 31 36 7 Ethnicity Caucasian 73 African American 1 1 Asian 33 Latino 13 Other 4 80.6% of all subjects were able to recall the brand Canon when asked, List all brands of digital camera that you can recall; 33.6% of all subjects considered Canon as their favorite bran d of digital camera brand when asked, What is your favorite digital brand?; 62.7 % of all participants had searched for information about Canons digital camera when asked, Have you ever searched for information about Canons digital camera? and 38.8% of subjects owned Canon digital cameras when asked, Do you ow n a Canon digital camera?.

PAGE 40

40 Measures Mean scores for each measurement item and scale were computed and provided in Table 5 2. The results showed that the mean score of brand association was 4. 81 (SD = 0.96), subjective knowledge was 3.66 (SD = 1.22), and familiarity was 4.47 (SD = 1.56). The three knowledge measures, subjective knowledge, familiarity, and brand association, were summed to create on expertise measure. The 1 34 respondents had a mean of 9.96 (SD = 2.26) on the expertise measures with the maximum and minimum score being 15.49 and 4.70 respectively The mean scores of respondents for brand association (10 items), subjective knowledge (7 items), and familiarity (1 item) averaged and then summed to create the expertise scale. The median of the mean scores was 10.319. A median split (median = 10.319) was used to create the expert and novice groups. As a result, a total of 134 participants were included in the following analysis: 68 s ubjects (25 were male and 43 were female) were categorized in the expert group and 66 subjects (24 were m ale and 42 were female) were classified as the novice group. The results showed that the mean scores of expert and novice groups were 11.77 (SD = 1.24) and 8.10 (SD = 1.40), respectively (see Table 5-2). Dependent M easures were operationalized using 7point semantic differential scales. Appendix C shows the items used for thes e two variables. The results showed that the mean score of attitude was 4.65 (SD = 1.08); purchase intention was 3.56 (SD = 1.62) (see Table 5 2).

PAGE 41

41 The three construct (brand association, subjective knowledge, familiarity) were expected to positively correl ate with one other. A correlation analysis was conducted, Table 5 2. Summary of variables Variables M SD Brand association Subjective knowledge Familiarity (single item) 4.81 3,66 4.47 0.96 1.23 1.56 0 .90 0.90 Expert/Novice (N=134) Expert (N=68) 9.96 11.77 2,26 1.24 Novice (N=66) 8.10 1.40 Attitude toward to endorsed product 4.65 1.08 0.90 Purchase intention 3.57 1.62 0.94 and a measure of each construct was obtained by averaging items. The results revealed significant correlations among all three measures. The correlation coefficient between brand association and subjective knowledge was 0. 44 (p < 0.01); the correlation coefficient between brand association and familiarity was 0.50 (p < 0.01), and the correlation coefficient between familiarity and subjective knowledge wa s 0.69 (p < 0.01) (see Table 5-3 ). Table 5 3. Simple correlation among association index score, subjective knowledge index score, and familiarity index score Variables Brand association Subjective knowledge Brand association Subjective knowledge .44** Familiarity .50** .69** Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01. To further examine the relations among three constructs and dependent variables, correlations were used. Brand Association The correlation coefficient between attitude and brand association was 0.31, this suggested that subjects who had high brand association also had a more positive

PAGE 42

42 attitude toward the endorsed product (p < 0.01). Moreover, the result also revealed that the correlation coefficient between purchase intention and brand assoc iation was 0.38. This indicated that subjects with high brand association were more interested in purchasing the camera; the result was also statistically significant (p < 0.01) (see Table 5 -4 ). Table 5 4 Simple correlation among brand association index s core, attitude index score, and purchase intention index score. Variables Brand association Attitude Brand association Attitude .31** Purchase intention .38** .37** Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01. Subjective K nowledge Seven statements employing a 7-point likert scale were given to the subjects to examine their self assessment about the product. A correlation analysis was used to examine the relations between consumers subjective knowledge and their attitude and purchase intention. The correlation coefficient between purchase in tention and subjective knowledge was 0.25 (p < 0.01). However, the correlation between attitude and subjective knowledge was not statis tically significant (see Table 5 -5 ). Table 5 5 Simple correlation among subjective knowledge index score, attitude index score and purchase intention index score. Variables Subjective knowledge Attitude Subjective Knowledge Attitude 01 Purchase intention .25** .37** Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01. Familiarity Correlation analysis was used to assess how familiar the subjects were with Canon digital camera. The correlation coefficient between purchase intention and

PAGE 43

43 familiarity was 0.31 (p < 0.01); however, the correlation between attitude and familiarity was not statistically signific ant (see Table 56 ). Table 5 6 Simple correlation among familiarity index score, attitude index score, and purchase intention index score. Variables Familiarity Attitude Familiarity Attitude .04 Purchase intention .31** .37** Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01. Test of the Hypotheses A 2 ( ex pert versus novice) X 3 (congruent versus moderately incongruent versus highly incongruent) experimental design was used first. A univariate analysis of variance was conducted to identify the relationships among these variables. In the first ANOVA test, e xpertise and congruence were treated as the independent vari ables and attitud e was the dependent variable. A significant main effect of expertise emerged in the test (F (1, 128) = 4.19, p < 0.05), the expert group (Mean= 4.83, SD= 0.13, N= 68) had more pos itive attitudes than did the novice group (Mean= 4.3 6, SD= 0.13, N= 66) (see Table 57 ). The main effect of congruence on attitude was also significant (F (2,128) = 3.06, p 0.05) (see Table 5-7 ). The results indicated that mean score of congruity was 4.94; moderate incongruity was 4.61; high incongruity was 4.39. Post hoc analysis using the Scheffe post hoc criterion indicated the three congruities were not significantly di fferent from each other No two way i nteraction effect was observed For the second ANOVA test, expertise and congruence were also treated as independent variables and purchase intention was the dependent variable. The main

PAGE 44

44 effect of expertise on purchase intention was significant (F (1,1 28) = 6.21, p < 0.05) (see Tabl e 5 8 ). Table 5 7 Between -subject effects, dependent variable: Attitude. Sum of Squares df F test P Level of knowledge Degree of congruence Between groups 4.71 1 4.19* 0.04 Within g roups Between groups Within groups 143.82 6.87 143.82 128 2 128 3.06* 0.050 Note.1. *p<.05 The result also revealed that the expert group (Mean= 3.91, SD= .19, N= 68) generated greater purchase intention than the novice group (Mean= 3.22, SD= .20, N = 66). However, the main effect of congruence on purchase intention was not statistically significant, this suggested that different degrees of congruence instead of purchase intentions, influence consumers attitude toward the endorsed product. No twoway interaction was observed. Table 5 8 Between -subject effects, dependent variable: Purchase intention. Sum of Squares df F test P Level of knowledge Between groups 15.63 1 6.21* 0.01 Within groups 322.11 128 Note.1. *p<. 05 Expert s Although the a bsence of twoway interactions for purchase intention and attitude suggested problems for the main hypotheses, simple effects tests were still performed to check on the validity of the productions these were reported in the sections that follow.

PAGE 45

45 Hypothesi s 1 predicted that experts would show more positive attitudes toward moderately incongruous endorsed products than congruence endorsed products and highly incongruous endorsed products. Among experts only, the effect of congruence on attitude was not statistically significant, F (2, 65) = 2.05, p= 0.14. Hypothesis 2 predicted that experts would show greater purchase intention toward moderately incongruous endorsed products than congruous endorsed products and highly incongruous endorsed products. The res ult revealed that the effect of congruence on purchase intention was not statistically significant, F (2, 65) = 0.86, p= 0.43. Novice s Hypothesis 3 predicted that novices would show positive attitude toward congruously endorsed product than moderately incongruously and highly incongruous endorsed products. Among novices only, the result revealed that the effect of congruence on attitude was not statistically significant F (2, 63) = 1.29, p = 0.28. Hypothesis 4 predicted that novices would show greater pur chase intentions toward congruously endorsed product than moderately incongruous and highly incongruous endorsed products. The result indicated that the effect of congruence on purchase intention wa s not statistically significant, F (2, 63) = 1.14, p = 0.33. Additional Findings The Brand awareness section included questions that asked respondents to list all digital camera brands that they could recall as well as indicate their favorite brand of digital camera.

PAGE 46

46 The correlation coefficient between purchas e intention and awareness was 0.24 (p < 0.01); however, the correlation between attitude and awareness was not significant (see Table 59 ). Table 5 9 Simple Correlation among awareness index score, attitude index score, and purchase intention index score. Variables Awareness Attitude Awareness Attitude .13 Purchase intention .24** .37** Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01. Usage experience section included three questions that asked whether respondents had ever searched for information about a Canon digital camera, whether they owned one, and the frequency of usage if they owned a Canon digital camera. The correlation coefficient between attitude and experience was 0.27, which suggested that subjects who were experienced had a more positive attitude toward the endorsed product (p < 0.01). Moreover, the results further indicated that correlation between experience and purchase intention wa s 0.37 (p < 0.01) (see Table 5 -10 ). Table 5 10 Simple Correlation among experience index score, attitude index score, and purchase intention index score. Variables Experience Attitude Experience Attitude .27** Purchase intention .37** .37** Note: all tests were two-tailed. ** p < .01

PAGE 47

47 CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCL USION Summary In this study, three knowledge measures familiarity, subjective knowledge, and brand association were used to create an experti se scale to measure consumers knowledge. This research corresponds with Fiske et al.s (1994) observation that both brand knowledge and product category knowledge are acquired through experience with the product category, and are thus integrally related in most circumstances (p. 43). The three measures were derived from brand knowledge and product category knowledge and were empirically highly correlated with one another. Although no interaction of expertise and congruence was observed, the research sh owed that experts engender more positive attitudes and greater purchase intentions toward the endorsed product among consumers than novices do. The results correspond with Mita and Sujans (1985) statement that expert consumers would produce more total re sponse to communications (p. 34). In addition, there is a significant effect of congruence on attitude, despite post hoc analysis that indicated that the congruence among print ads was not statistically significantly different. Participants showed a mo re positive attitude toward highly congruent (M = 4.95) endorsed products than moderately incongruent (M = 4.60) or highly incongruent endorsed products (M = 4.39). This result is consistent with Kim and Nas (2007) findings which demonstrated that when a celebrity endorser and an endorsed product have a good fit, consumers evaluate the endorsed product more favorably.

PAGE 48

48 Moreover, participants answers to two openended questions (list all brands of digital cameras you can recall and what is your favorite digital camera) reveal that participants with high brand awareness have greater purchase intentions than those with lower brand awareness. This result partly supports Hoyer and Browns (1990) conclusion that brand awareness may have considerable effect on consumer choice (p. 147). This result also indicated that experienced participants have more positive attitudes and greater purchase intentions than those who are less experienced. D iscussion Experts The study proposed that experts have a more positive attitude and greater purchase intentions toward moderately congruent endorsed products than toward highly congruent or highly incongruent endorsed products based on previous research (Hypotheses 1 and 2). Lee and Thorsons (2008) research suggested that, i n evaluating celebrity endorsements, consumers have greater purchase intentions when moderate incongruity exists between the endorsers and their endorsed products and that participants with higher product involvement are more likely to be influenced by cel ebrity product congruence (p. 9). However, the results of the current research did not reveal a more positive attitude or greater purchase intentions toward moderately incongruent endorsed products. This result can be attributed to several causes. First, a digital camera is a highprice/highinvolvement product for which consumers perform research, including reading customer reviews, product descriptions, and product features and exploring the product category based on their schemas before making purchase decisions (Chang & Mendonnca, 2004). In addition, a study by Roehm and Sternthal (2001) reported that highly

PAGE 49

49 knowledgeable consumers may exhibit a tendency to delve into the details of the message, especially for high technology oriented products (p. 261). In other words, experts are likely to conduct research before they purchase a technology oriented product, so celebrity endorsements may not play a significant role in experts product evaluation. This point of view is in keeping with Biswas et al.s (2 006) finding that expert consumers are not easily influenced in their decision -making by a celebrity endorser. Additionally, because participants had a oneweek window in which to complete the survey, they may not have taken the survey seriously. If the participants felt that the survey was not important, their concentration when answering the questions and reviewing the simulated print advertisements could have been affected. It is also possible that the participants discussed the survey with other parti cipants who received the survey. Novices In measuring purchase intention and attitude, the current study found that the novice group did not behave as expected under different degrees of congruence. The study hypothesized that novices would generate greater purchase intentions and more positive attitudes toward highly congruent endorsed products than moderately incongruent or highly incongruent endorsed products (Hypotheses 3 and 4). Several reasons explain why novices exhibited behaviors different from t hose expected. First, some participants failed to recall digital cameras in the first section of the survey; for example, 29% of the novice participants were not able to recall the Canon brand versus 10% of expert participants. Second, novices were less familiar with Canons digital camera (M = 3.44) than experts were (M = 5.44). Since some novices were not familiar with the endorsed brand, the degrees of congruity between celebrity endorsers and

PAGE 50

50 endorsement may not have been a factor in moderating their at titudes and purchase intentions toward the endorsed product. Furthermore, Rao and Monroe (1988) stated that consumers with low familiarity tend to use extrinsic cues such as price to evaluate a product. However, the simulated print ads did not provide pri ce information, which could potentially impact the purchase intentions of novice participants. Overall, novices generated fewer purchase intentions in all three congruity situations. Congruence The study found that different degrees of congruence could influence participants attitudes toward the endorsed product. The mean suggested that, when their attitude is measured, participants score higher under high-congruence conditions (M = 4.95) than moderate-incongruence (M = 4.60) or highincongruence condit ions (M = 4.39). This result was consistent with previous studies that found that schema congruity leads to a favorable response because other things being equal, people like objects that conform to their expectations and allow predictability (Meyers -Lev y & Tybout, 1989). To sum up, although the results of this research did not support the hypotheses, it still provides evidence that all participants behave favorably under high-congruence conditions. In addition, it indirectly supports the schema congruit y theory used in most previous studies. The results also support evidence from previous studies that knowledge plays an important role in consumer behavior. Implications The results indicated that both novice and expert participants responded to endorsed products based on their levels of congruity. The participants had a more positive attitude toward highly congruent endorsed products than toward moderately

PAGE 51

51 incongruent or highly incongruent endorsed products. Therefore, the findings suggest that, when mark eters consider using celebrity endorsements, a high level of congruence between a high-tech product that requires consumer knowledge and an endorser with a matching image will better motivate consumers. Through marketing pretests, marketers can evaluate th e congruity between celebrity endorsers and endorsed products before they run advertisements. Moreover, the results indicated that consumers who are familiar with the products or more experienced with the products had higher purchase intentions than those who were not familiar with them or who were less experienced. Therefore, it is recommended that companies focus more on current consumers than potential consumers by, for example, improving the quality of consumer service after each purchase. This approac h could increase consumers satisfaction with a company as well as with its products. Since current consumers are likely to be more familiar and experienced with the product, the possibility of re-purchase increases when they receive highquality, post pur chase service. Furthermore, the results derived from the questions in the brand association section suggested that brand association correlates with participants attitudes and purchase intentions. Therefore, marketers should consider differentiating th eir products by reinforcing their brand. The results also showed that consumers who received high scores in the brand awareness section (recognition task) were more likely to purchase the product than those who scored low in this section. The result impli ed that if consumers can recall a specific brand the first time theyre asked, they are more inclined to purchase products

PAGE 52

52 of that brand. Therefore, the amount of exposure to a product plays an important role in consumers purchase intention. Consumers who receive more information and high levels of exposure to a product demonstrate greater purchase intentions because they store the image of the product in their consideration set, which is critical when developing purchase intentions. Thus, marketers can hold events and use public relations strategies to reach consumers and increase exposure of their products, as well as their company. The last section of the questionnaire consisted of self assessment questions through which participants were asked to measure their knowledge regarding Canon. The results indicated that consumers who consider themselves experts in the field exhibit greater purchase intention than those who do not. The correlation between subjective knowledge and consumers purchase intention was statistically significant. Therefore, high-tech product manufacturers should give consumers more opportunities to gain knowledge about their products, thereby reducing consumers fear of high-tech products. This study suggests that marketers can build an informative Web site that not only provides up-to -date information about a product, but also interacts with consumers. This approach could provide consumers with a more thorough understanding of the product. Limitations of th e Research and Directions f or Future Research Several limitations of this study may affect the research results. First, the sample size (134 students) was not large and did not result in statistical significance in the interaction test. Second, previous studies focused on product c ategories instead of a specific brand and did not provide an objective knowledge scale for a specific brand; therefore,

PAGE 53

53 this study did not use objective knowledge, which may have influenced the validity of the expertise scale used. Third, this study used only one specific product instead of a broad range of digital cameras. This limitation could decrease the resulting purchase intention and influence consumers positive attitudes because some consumers may consider themselves experts in digital cameras ins tead of loyal consumers of Canon. Fourth, consumers who already owned a digital camera or who had recently purchased one may be reluctant to buy another in the next year, which may have influenced their reporting of purchase intention. Finally, the part icipants in this study were primarily college students, so they may not have enough money to purchase highpriced products, which may have influenced their reporting of purchase intention. This research has potential for future expansion. Although this re search did not generate statistically significant evidence of a connection between expertise and congruence in terms of purchase intention and attitude, the hypotheses proposed, while unsupported, may not be false. Future researchers who build a complete experimental design and collect more data may obtain results that support these hypotheses. In addition, because of the absence of an appropriate criterion, this research did not use objective-knowledge questions to measure participants knowledge, which could have decreased the validity of the expertise scale created for this study. Future research could adopt more types of knowledge measures, such as knowledge of product categories, brand knowledge, and prior knowledge, to evaluate participants expertise,

PAGE 54

54 attitudes, and purchase intentions. This approach could create a different perspective in the research into celebrity endorsement. Although considerable research has already been devoted to this topic, these studies have focused primarily on the relationship between endorser product congruity and attitude, instead of on the consumers level of knowledge. Future research could measure the effect of endorser product congruity in terms of product attributes, price, content, and similar factors. Another oppo rtunity for future research is to expand upon the two dependent variables of attitude and purchase intention used in this study to include, for example, product evaluation, intention to recommend endorsed products to friends, and length of time between pur chases of the same product. To sum up, future research should explore more variables to assist marketers in choosing endorsers appropriate for various marketing scenarios. Knowledge in this area is particularly critical for high -tech product manufacturers, which need consumers to become heavily involved in their marketing campaigns.

PAGE 55

55 APPENDIX A SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE Part A. Please read the following question carefully, and circle one choice from the scale that most accurately reflects your opinion. 1 How familiar are you with Canons line of digital cameras? Not very familiar (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very familiar

PAGE 56

56 Part B. Please read the following question carefully, and circle one choice from the scale that most accurately reflects your opinion. 1. Imagine tennis star Maria Sharapova was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon camera. In your opinion, this would be. Very Inappropriate (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate Very Inconsistent (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7 ) Very Consistent Very Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely Highly Irrelevant (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant Does not match (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well Does not go together (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together

PAGE 57

57 2. Imagine Avril Lavigne was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon camera. In your opinion, this would be. Very Inappropriate (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate Very Inconsistent (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent Very Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely Highly Irrelevant (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant Does not match (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well Does not go together (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together

PAGE 58

58 3. Imagine Jack Black was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon camera. In your opinion, this would be. Very Inappropriate (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate Very Inconsistent (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent Very Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely Highly Irrelevant (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant Does not match (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well Does not go to gether (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together

PAGE 59

59 4. Imagine Meryl Streep was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon camera. In your opinion, this would be. Very Inappropriate (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate Very Inconsistent (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent Very Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely Highly Irrelevant (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant Does not match (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well D oes not go together (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together

PAGE 60

60 5. Imagine Ben Affleck was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon camera. In your opinion, this would be. Very Inappropriate (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appr opriate Very Inconsistent (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent Very Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely Highly Irrelevant (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant Does not match (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well Does not go together (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together

PAGE 61

61 6. Imagine Cameron Diaz was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon camera. In your opinion, this would be. Very Inappropriate (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate Very Inconsistent (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent Very Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely Highly Irrelevant (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant Does not match (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) ( 7) Matches very well Does not go together (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together

PAGE 62

62 7. Imagine Bob Dole was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon camera. In your opinion, this would be. Very Inappropriate (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate Very Inconsistent (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent Very Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely Highly Irrelevant (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant Does not match (1) (2) (3) (4 ) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well Does not go together (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together

PAGE 63

63 8. Imagine Jessica Alba was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon camera. In your opinion, this would be. Very Inappropriate (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate Very Inconsistent (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent Very Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely Highly Irrelevant (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant Does not match (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well Does not go together (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together

PAGE 64

64 9. Imagine Kiefer Sutherland was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon camera. In your opinion, this would be. Very Inappropriate (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate Very Inconsistent (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent Very Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely Highly Irrelevant (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevan t Does not match (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well Does not go together (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together

PAGE 65

65 10. Imagine Sally Field was being considered as a celebrity endorser for this canon camera. In your opinion, this w ould be. Very Inappropriate (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Appropriate Very Inconsistent (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Consistent Very Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Likely Highly Irrelevant (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Highly Relevant Does not match (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matches very well Does not go together (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Goes together

PAGE 66

66 Part C. The following are demographic questions and will only be used for statistical analyses. 1. What is your name_______________________ 2. UF ID_________________ 3. What is your gender? Male Female 4. How old are you? _____ years old. 5. What is your major? ______________ 6. Year in school? Graduate Senior Junior Sophomore Freshman Other_ ____________ 7. Ethnicity White African American Asian Latin Other_____________ Thank you for your participation!

PAGE 67

67 APPENDIX B SECOND PRE -TEST Please write down the name of each celebr ity if you can. If you do not know put DK for dont know.

PAGE 68

68 APPENDIX C SURVEY QU ESTIONNAIRE Part A. Please read the following question carefully, and circle one choice from the scale that most accurately reflects your opinion. 1. Brand Awareness (1) List all brands of digital camera which you can recall? _____________ (2) What is yo ur favorite digital camera? __________________

PAGE 69

69 2. Association Indicate that you agree/disagree the following statements regarding Canon, the camera brand? Perceived value (3)Canon digital camera provides good value for the money. Strongly Disagr ee (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree (4)There are good reasons to buy Canon digital camera versus competing brand. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree Personality (5)The brand, Canon has a personality. Strongl y Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree (6) The brand, Canon is interesting. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree (7)I have a clear image of the type of person who would use a Canon camera. Strongly Disag ree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree Organization (8)I trust the Canon Company. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree

PAGE 70

70 (9) I admire the Canon Company. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agr ee (10)I believe Canon has established its credibility among many consumers Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree Differentiation (11)Canon digital cameras are different from competing brands. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3 ) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree (12)Canon digital cameras are basically the same as competing brands. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree 3. User Experience (13) Have you ever search ed for information about C anon digit al camera? Yes____ No____ (14) Do you own a C anon digital camera? Yes______ No _____ If yes, how frequently do you use it? Not very frequently (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very frequently (15)H ow familiar are you with Canon digital cameras? Not very f amiliar (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Very Familiar

PAGE 71

71 3 Subjective Knowledge Indicate that you agree/disagree the following statements regarding Canon, the camera brand. (16) I know a lot about Canon. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) St rongly Agree (17)I know how to evaluate Canon digital camera. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree (18) I think I know enough about Canon digital camera so that I am fairly confident when making a purchase. Strongly Disag ree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree (19) Among my friends, I am considered the experts on Canon digital camera. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree (20) I can tell if the price of a Canon digital camera is justified. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree (21) I can per form problem shooting on Canon digital camera when it is broken. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree (22) I know where to purchase a good quality Canon digital camera. Strongly Disagree (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Agree

PAGE 72

72 Part B. Attitude and Purchase intention Please view the advertisement, and carefully answer the following questions

PAGE 73

73 (A) Please circle the appropriate number that describes your attitude toward the Canon digital camera closely after you view the print Ad. Strongly Dislike (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Like Unfavorable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Favorable Negative (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7 ) Positive (B) Please circle the number that best can represents your purchase intentions for a Canon digital camera closely in the next year. Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Likely Definitely would not (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Definitely wou ld Improbable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Probable

PAGE 74

74 Part B. Attitude and Purc hase intention Please view the advertisement, and carefully answer the following questions

PAGE 75

75 (A) Please circle the appropriate number that describes your attitude toward t he Canon digital camera closely after you view the print Ad. Strongly Dislike (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Like Unfavorable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Favorable Negative (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Positive (B) Please circle the number that best can represents your purchase intentions for a Canon digital camera closely in the next year. Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Likely Definitely would not (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Definitely would Improbable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7 ) Probable

PAGE 76

76 Part B. A ttitude and Purchase intention Please view the advertisement, and carefully answer the following questions

PAGE 77

77 (A) Please circle the appropriate number that describes your attitude toward the Canon digital camera closely after you view the print Ad. Strongly Dislike (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Strongly Like Unfavorable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Favorable Negative (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Positive (B) Please circle the number that best can represents your purchase inten tions for a Canon digital camera closely in the next year. Unlikely (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Likely Definitely would not (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Definitely would Improbable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Probable

PAGE 78

78 LIST OF REFERENCES Aaker, D. A. (1 991), Managing Brand Equity The Free Press, New York, NY. Aaker, D. A. (1996), Measuring brand equity across products and markets California Management Review, Vol. 3 N o 3, pp.18-2 1. Alba, J. W. and Hutchinson, J. W. (1987), Dimensions of cons umer expertise Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13 No 4 pp. 411-454. Allport, G. W. (1935), Attitudes i n C.A. Murchison (Ed. ), A H and book of social psychology, Clark University Press, New York NY, pp. 798 -844. Baker, T. L., Hunt, J. B. and Sc ribner, L. L. (2002), The effect of introducing a new brand on consumer perceptions of current brand similarity: t he roles of product knowledge and involvement Journal of Marketing Theory and Practic e Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 45 -58 Bartlett, F. C. (1932) Remembering : A Study I n Experimental and S ocial Psychology, Cambridge University Press Cambridge MA Belch, G. E. and Michael A. B. (1994), Introdu ction to A dvertising and Promotion: An I ntegrated M arketing C ommunication P erspective, 3 rd ed. Irwin Homewood IL pp. 290-316. Bettma n J. R. and Park, C. W. (1980), Effects of prior knowledge and experience and phase of the choice process o n consumer decision processes: a protocol analysis Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 234-248 Biswas, A. and Sherrell, D. L. (1993), The influence of product knowledge and brand name on internal price standards and confidence Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 1 pp. 60 69. Biswas, D., Biswas, A. and Das, N. (2006), The differential effects of celebrity and expert endorsements on consumer risk perceptions Journal of Advertising, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 17 -31. Bradley, S. (1996), Marketers are always looking for good pitchers, Brandweek, February 26, pp 36 3 7 Brucks, M. (1985),The effect s of product class knowledge on information search behavior Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12 No.1, pp. 1 16. Craik, F. I. M. and Lockhart, R. (1972), Levels of processing: a framework of memory research Journal of V erbal L earning and Verbal B ehav ior Vol. 11 pp. 671-684

PAGE 79

79 David Backer (2005, April 14) Canon leads in digital camera sales. Message posted to http://news.cnet.com/Canonleads -in digital -c amera -sales/2100 -1041_3 5671205.html De B ono, K. G., Omoto, A. M. (2001), Individuals differences in predicting behavioral intentions from attitude and subjective norm Journal of Social Psychology Bulletin Vol. 133 No. 6 pp. 825831. De B ono, K. G., Snyder, M. (1995), Acting on ones attitudes: the role of a history of choosing situations Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 620628. Desai, K. K. and Gencturk, E. (1995), Schema incongruity: m ultidimensional pe rspective involving advertising schema, self Schema, and product schema Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 390390. Dimofte, C. V., Forehand, M. R. and Deshpande, R. (2003), Ad schema incongruity as elicitor of ethnic self awareness and differential advertising response Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 7-17 Eagly, A. H., Mladinic, A. and Otto, S. (1992), Cognitive and affective basses of attitudes toward social groups and social policies Journal of Experimental S ocial Psychology, Vo l, 30 No. 2, pp. 113137. Fabrigar, L. R., Petty, R. E., Smith, S. M. and Crites, S. L. (2006), Understanding knowledge effects on attitude behavior consistency: t he role of relevance, complexity, and amount of knowledge Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 90 No. 4, pp. 556577. Fiske, C. A., Luebbehusen, L.A., Miyazaki, A.D. and Urbany, J. E. (1994), The relationship between knowledge and search: i t depends Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 43 50. Fiske, K. T., Kinder, D. R. and Larter, W. M. (1983), The novice and the expert: knowledge based strategies in political cognition Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 381400. Flynn, L. R. and Goldsmith, R. E. (1999), A s hort, reliable measure of subjective knowledge Journal of Business Research, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp 5766. Freiden, J. B. (1984), Advertising spokesperson effects: An examination of endorser type and gender on two audiences Journal of Advertising Researc h, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 33-41. Friedman, H. H. and Friedman, L. (1979), Endorser effective by product type Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 6371.

PAGE 80

80 Goldsmith, R. E., Lafferty, B. A. and Newell, S. J. (2000), The impact of corporate credibility and celebrity credibility on consumer reaction to advertisements and brands Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 4354 Gronhaug, K., Hem, L. and Lines, R. (2002), Exploring the impact of product category risk and consume r k nowledge in brand extensions Journal of Brand Management Vol. 9 No. 6 pp. 463-476 Gwinner, K. (1997), A model of image creation and image transfer in event sponsorship International Marketing Review, Vol. 14 No 3, pp. 145158. Gwinner, K. P. and Eaton, J. (1999), Building brand image through event sponsorship, Journal of Advertising Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 45 57. Heerden, N. V., Kuiper, A. K. and Saar, H. M. (2008), Investigating sport celebrity endorsement and sport event sponsorship as promotional cues South Africa Journal for Research in Sport, Physical Education and Recreation, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 147165. Hovland, C. I. and Weiss, W. (1951 -1952), The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 635650. Hoyer, W. D. and Brown, S. P. (1990), Effects of brand awareness on choice for a c ommon, repeat -purchase product, Journal of Consumer Research Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 141148. Kahle, L. R. and Homer, P. M. (1985), Physical att ractiven ess of the celebrity endorser: a s ocial adaptation perspective Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 954-961. Kamins, M. A. (1990), An Investigation into the Matchup hypothesis in celebrity advertising: w hen beauty may be only sk in deep Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 413. Keller, K. L. (1993), Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer based brand equity, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 1 22 Kim, YeungJo and Na, June Hee (20 07), Effects of celebrity athlete endorsement on attitude towards the product: the role of credibility, attractiveness and the concept of congruence International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 310320. Lee, JungGyo and Thorson, E. (2008), The Impact of celebrity product incongruence on the effectiveness of product endorsement Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp.433 -449.

PAGE 81

81 Lee, M. (1995), Effects of schema congruity and involvement on product evaluations Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 210216. Lynch, J and Schuler, D. (1994), The matchup effect of spokesperson and product congruency: A schema theory interpretation Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 5 pp. 417445. Maheswa ran, D. and Sternthal, B. (1990), The effects of knowledge, motivation, and type of message on ad processing and product judgments Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 6673. McCracken, G. (1989), Who is the celebrity endorser? Culture foundations of the endorsement process, Journal of Consumer Research December Vol.16 No. 3 pp. 310-3 21 McGuire, W. J. (1985). Attitudes and Attitude C hange i n G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (Ed .), A handbook of social psychology New York NY : Random Hou se pp. 233346. Meyers Levy, J. and Tybout, A. M. (1989), Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 3954. Misra, S. and Beatty, S. E. (1990),Celebrity spokesperson and brand congruence: a n assessment of recall affect Journal of Business Research, Vol. 21 No. 2 pp. 159173. Mittelstaedt, J. D, Riesz P. C. and Burns, W. J. (2000), Why endorsements effective? Sorting among theories of product and endorser effects Journal of Current Iss ues and Research in Advertising, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 5566. Ohanian, R. (1990), Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 3952. Pappu, R., Quester, P. G. and Cooksey, R. W. (2005), Consumer based brand equity: improving the measurement empirical evidence Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 143 -154. Park, C. W., Feick, L. and Mothersbaugh, D. L. (1992), Consumer knowledge assessment: How product experience and knowledge of brands, attributes, and features affects what we think we know Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 193198. Peracchio, L. A. and Tybout, A. M. (1996), The moderating role of prior knowledge in schema-based product evaluations Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 177192.

PAGE 82

82 Petty, R. D. (2006), Hit or Mislead Marketing Management Vol 15 No. 5, pp. 44 -48. Petty, R. E., Wegener, D. E. an d Fabrigar, L. R. (1997), Attitudes and attitudes change Annul Review of Psychology Vol. 48, pp. 609 -647. Philippe, A. and Ngobo, Paul -Valentin (1999) Assessment of consumer knowledge and its consequences: A multi -component approach Advances in Consumers research, Vol 26 No. 1, pp. 569-575. Preister, J. R. Godek, J. and Nayakankuppum, DJ. Park, K. (2004), Brand congruity and comparative advertising: when and why comparative advertisements lead to greater elaboration, Journal of Consumer Ps ychology, Vol. 14 No. 1 2 pp. 115123. Raju, P. S., Lonial, S. C. and Mangold, W. G. (1995), Differential effects of subjective knowledge, objective knowledge and usage expertise on decision making: a n exploratory investigation Journal of Consumer Psy chology Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 153180. Rao, A. R. and Monroe, K. B. (1988), The moderating effect of prior knowledge in cue utilization in product evaluations Journal of Consumer Research Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 253-264. Roehm, M. L. and Sternthal, B. (2001), The moderating effect of knowledge and resources on the persuasive impact of analogies, Journal of Cons umer Research, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 257272. Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E. and McClelland, J. L. (1986), A general framework for parallel distributed processing, I n Rumelhart, D.E. and McClelland, J.L (Ed. ) P arallel Distributed Processing Foundations, Bradford, Cambridge, MA Rumelhart, D. E. and Ortony, A. (1977), The repres entation of knowledge in memory i n Sc hooling and the Acquis ition of K nowledge, Anderson R. C., Spiro, R. J. and Montague W. E. (Ed.) Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Hillsdale, NJ Schmitt, B. H. and Geus, P. (2006), Are brands forever? How brand knowledge and relationships affect current and future purchases Journal of Product and Brand Management Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 98 105. Seno, D. and Lukas, B. A. (2007), The equity effect of product endorsement by celebrities A conceptual framework from a co branding perspective European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41 No. 1 2, pp. 121 -134. Smith, G. (2004), Brand image transfer through sponsorship: consumer learning perspective Journal of Marketing Management Vol. 20, pp. 454-474

PAGE 83

83 Sujan, M. (1985), Consumer knowledge: effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer judgments Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 31 46. Tellis, G. J. (2004), Effective advertising: Understanding when, how, and why advertising works Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks CA, pp. 180185. Till, B. D (1998a), Usi ng celebrity endorsers effectively: lessons from associative learning Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 7 No. 5 pp. 400-409 Till, B. D. and Shimp, T. A. (1998 b), Endorsers in advertising: t he case of negative celebrity information Journ al of Advertising Research, V ol. 27 No. 1, pp. 6782. Tripp, C., Jensen, T. D and Carson, L. (1994), The effects of multiple product endorsements by celebrities on consumers attitudes and intentions Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 535-547. Westover, M. L. and Randle, Q. (2009), Endorser weight and perceptions of brand attitude and intent to purchase Journal of Promotion management Vol. 15 No. 1-2, pp. 57-73.

PAGE 84

84 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Wei -Hsuan Yang enrolled in the Dep artment of Advertising in the College of Journalism and Communications at the University of Florida in August 2008, and graduated with a Master of Advertising degree in 2010. She received her bachelors degree in advertising from the College of Communicati on at the Ming Chuan University, Taipei, Taiwan. Her research interests include international advertising and branding.