CREDIBILITY "ethos is the most potent of all means of persuasion" (Aristotle, The Rhetoric, 1356a) “To become a celebrity is to become a brand name” (Phillip Roth)

Definition of credibility: "judgments made by a perceiver (e.g., message recipient) concerning the believability of a communicator" (O'Keefe, 1995, pp ) What is Credibility?

A reliable generalization “A highly credible source is commonly found to induce more persuasion toward the advocacy than a low credibility source” (Pornpitakpan, 2004) “The generalization that high credibility sources are more influential than low credibility sources is as close as one can come to a universal law of persuasion” (Gass & Seiter, 2007)

Celebrity endorsers: Selling ethos 20% of all television commercials feature a famous person (Stevens & Rice, 1998) Roughly 10% of advertising expenditures go to pay the endorser (Agrawal & Kamakura, 1995) Selling power is known as a celebrity’s “quotient fare” or simply “Q”

The match-up hypothesis Endorsers are more effective when there is a "fit" between the endorser and the endorsed product Kamins, 1990.

The match-up hypothesis How do these four endorsers fit the “My Life, My Card” American Express image?

Which brands go with which endorsers? What brands would you match- up with Katie Couric, Amy Winehouse, Big Boi (Outkast), and Steven Spielberg?

More about celebrity endorsers $800 million was spent in the U.S. in 1998 on spokespersons Thompson, 1998) Reliance on celebrity endorsers crosses all product categories (Thompson, 1998) gender and celebrity endorsers Once relegated 2 nd class status, women endorsers now lead the field

Are celebrity spokespersons effective? Study by Yankelovich and Gannett, of 1,000 consumers nationwide: Only 25% of those questioned said a TV ad would induce them to try a product or brand Only 3% said they would try a new product based on the recommendations of a celebrity 63% said they would try something new based on the advice of a friend. But: is what they say, what they would actually do? Even 3% of a national television audience would represent millions of viewers.

Celebrity endorsers: the downside Tarnished halos: Martha Stewart (convicted of lying about insider trading) Mel Gibson (DUI and anti- Semitic remarks Tom Cruise (kooky behavior, denigrated Brooke Shields for taking anti-depressants) Michael Richards (string of racial epithets) scandals produce negative fallout for the sponsor's image as well increased use of animated and animal endorsers can be attributed, in part, to a fear of endorser scandals hurting business

Celebrities and politics "There is no polling evidence that celebrity endorsements make a difference,“ Kathleen Hall Jamieson "political endorsements generally have little impact on voter preference." A 2007 study by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press It may be that celebrities are more successful motivating people to vote in general as opposed to tendering a vote for a specific candidate.” Natalie Wood, Ph.D., marketing professor

Conceptualizing credibility credibility as a receiver- based construct credibility as a multi- dimensional construct credibility as a situational/contextual construct (McCroskey & Young, 1981) what isn’t part of source credibility? physical attractiveness? clothing?)

Credibility as a perceptual phenomenon Wilson (1968): A guest speaker from Cambridge, England was introduced to five different classes. His status in the introduction varied: Student, Lecturer, Associate professor, Full professor After he left the room, the class was asked to estimate his height. With each increase in status, the perceived height of the guest speaker increased ½ inch. The full professor was perceived as 2 ½ inches taller than the student.

How credibility works Petty & Cacioppo's ELM model central route (cognitive processing, deliberation, reflection) peripheral route (credibility, appearance factors, likeability) “preferential” processing role of involvement (familiarity with, importance of issue) Note: in Wilson & Sherrell's 1993) meta- analysis, 8 of 12 credibility studies (67%) supported the predictions of the ELM.

The factor analytic approach to credibility primary dimensions expertise (competence) trustworthiness (safety) goodwill (perceived caring) secondary dimensions dynamism or extroversion composure sociability inspiring functional approach to credibility; dimensions vary from situation to situation

expertise Sources who are high in expertise are generally more persuasive than sources who lack expertise High expertise sources can advocate more discrepant positions on issues Expertise may interact with attractiveness, gender, and perceived similarity

trustworthiness Jared Fogle, for Subway, isn’t a celebrity, but his “plain folks” appeal makes him trustworthy. Richard Hatch won the million dollars on Survivor, but is he trustworthy?

Sources can be high in one dimension and low in another Simon Cowell may have expertise, but lack perceived caring Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is high in expertise but low in dynamism

Amazing feats of credibility! Bill Clinton, dissociation between the man and the office: Clinton’s job approval ratings remained at a lofty 65% during the Monica Lewinsky scandal while his personal popularity plummeted to a dismal 35%. A 30 point discrepancy in job approval Vs. favorability ratings is unique in the history of the presidency Tiger Woods, defying the traditional logic Only a few celebrity superstars have been able to successfully endorse multiple products Tiger Woods is on track to become the first billion dollar endorser.

Moderating variables that affect credibility receiver involvement: credibility matters little if receiver involvement is high Low involved receivers are more susceptible to credibility appeals reliance on peripheral processing High involved listeners are less susceptible to credibility appeals reliance on central processing Authoritarianism Authoritarians are highly susceptible to appeals by admired sources Timing of source identification The source and the source’s qualifications must be identified prior to the presentation of the message

Blind obedience: The power of authorities Stanley Milgram’s (1974) classic research: Roughly 2/3s of the subjects followed an order to shock another person repeatedly. Hofling, Brotzman, Dalrymple, Graves, & Pierce (1966): 95% of nurses were willing administer potentially lethal doses of “Astrogen”

Generalizing the credibility construct Credibility applies not only to the rich and famous institutions and organizations possess credibility as well In dyadic encounters; there are two sources whose credibility is at stake Do fictional spokespersons possess credibility?

Institutional credibility: the good, the bad, and the ugly group entities concerned with their image Ronald McDonald House NFL and United Way tarnished corporate images Enron and Anderson Accounting CIA and intelligence on WMD Firestone tires Texaco and Denny's racial bias suits Exxon Valdez oil spill BATF and Ruby Ridge, Waco incidents