Cultural Differences in Television Celebrity Use in the United States and Lebanon
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ABSTRACT Jagdish and Kamakura (1995) argued that celebrity endorsement has become a prevalent form of advertising in United States. Approximately 20% of all television commercials feature a famous person, and approximately 10% of dollars spent on television advertising are used in celebrity endorsement advertisements (Advertising Age 1987; Sherman 1985). The purpose of this study is to compare use of celebrity endorsement between United Sates and Lebanon in terms of two fundamental cultural dimensions: 1) low versus high context, and 2) individualism versus collectivism. This study investigates differences and similarities regarding celebrity characteristics in U.S. and Lebanon. INTRODUCTION Jagdish and Kamakura (1995) argued that celebrity endorsement has become a prevalent form of advertising in United States. Approximately 20% of all television commercials feature a famous person, and approximately 10% of dollars spent on television advertising are used in celebrity endorsement advertisements (Advertising Age 1987; Sherman 1985). Schickel (1985) stated that American society is fascinated with celebrities and individuals from various fields such as, politics, sports, entertainment, business, fashion, and others are often elevated to celebrity status. Shimp (2000) estimated that around one-quarter of all commercials screened in United States include celebrity endorsers. Celebrities have been able to generate millions of dollars in endorsement deals to appear in advertisements. Erdogan (1999) postulated that companies invest large sums of money to align their brands and themselves with endorsers. For example, Nike signed a $100 million, five-year contract with Tiger Woods for his endorsements (Choi et al. 2005). There are several reasons for extensive use of celebrities in advertising. Research findings show that celebrities make advertisements believable (Kamins et al., 1989), enhance message recall (Friedman and Friedman 1979), aid in recognition of brand names (Petty, Cacioppo, and Schumann 1983), create a positive attitude towards brand (Kamins et al. 1989), and create a distinct personality for endorsed brand (McCracken 1989). Because is believed that celebrity endorsements are likely to generate a greater likelihood of customers choosing endorsed brand (Heath, McCarthy, and Mothersbaugh 1994; Kahle and Homer 1985), business are willing to pay high prices to obtain it. Choi, Lee and Kim (2005) argued that celebrity phenomenon is not limited to United Sates and appears to be universal. In spite of universality of this phenomenon, Choi et al. (2005. p. 85) state, No research to date has empirically examined assumption that celebrity endorsement strategy is used in a similar fashion from country to country, or that consumers around world respond to in a similar way. Most of celebrity research that has been conducted has been about United States. We believe that in order to develop a general understanding of such a universal phenomenon, research efforts must be broadened to cover more parts of world. The Arab world is one of regions historically ignored in advertising research. Abernethy and Franke (1996) found 40 out of 59 content analysis studies dealt with United States media and concluded, Much less is known about advertising information in other countries. For example, no study has examined advertising information in any African nation, any part of Middle East other than Saudi Arabia, or any of 'economies in transition' associated with former USSR (p. 15). Elbashier & Nicholls (1983, p. 68) stated that, it is perhaps somewhat surprising that academics have not gone further and attempted to examine impact of cultural differences in Arab countries on Marketing, as there is a considerable field of literature suggesting that several aspects of the marketing mix are culturally sensitive. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».