Cultural Differences in Television Celebrity Use in the United States and Lebanon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".