The influence of celebrity endorsement on the purchase behavior of brands and product categories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Celebrity endorsement has been profusely used to promote the consumption and purchase intention of diverse product categories; however, there is scarce research about whether celebrity endorsement effectiveness differs between brands and product categories. In this context, this study aims to answer this question: “Does consumer purchase behavior influenced by celebrity endorsement differ between brands and products?”. Design/methodology/approach To this end, a conceptual model of the influence of celebrity endorsement on consumer purchase behavior is examined through a multiple group structural equation modeling on two consumer samples (315 = brands; 308 = product categories). Samples were categorized as a celebrity promoting either a product category or a brand, and food products were selected as the product category for the investigation. Findings Findings indicate differences in the effectiveness of celebrity endorsement between brands and product categories: credibility is the most relevant variable influencing consumer purchase intention for product categories, while credibility and congruence both influence consumer purchase intention for brands. Similarly, the celebrity recommendation of brands generates greater purchase intention due to celebrity congruence with the endorsed product. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the present research is one of the first endeavors to compare the effectiveness of celebrity brand endorsement versus celebrity product endorsement on purchase intention.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".