european journal of social sciences issn: 1450-2267 - EuroJournals
european journal of social sciences issn: 1450-2267 - EuroJournals
european journal of social sciences issn: 1450-2267 - EuroJournals
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
European Journal <strong>of</strong> Social Sciences – Volume 5, Number 3 (2007)<br />
Table 2: Regression Model Purchase intentions as dependent variable Regression coefficient, st. error in<br />
parenthesis, t values in brackets and p values in italics<br />
Constant Attitude toward ad Attitude toward brand r 2 f value<br />
- 0.331 0.245 0.691 0.49 142.419<br />
(0.281) (0.63) (0.65)<br />
[-1.179] [3.900] [10.712]<br />
0.239 0.000 0.000 0.000<br />
To measure consumer perception about single celebrity ad and multiple celebrities’ ad for low<br />
involvement products first Independent sample t test is applied for single celebrity Pentane Pro V<br />
shampoo ad and multiple celebrities Lux soap ad. The p value for attitude toward ad, attitude toward<br />
brand and purchase intentions are (0.002, 0.048, 0.002) which shows that there is a significant<br />
difference at 0.05% level between single celebrity ad and multiple celebrities’ ad for low involvement<br />
products which proved our first hypothesis. The mean values are more positive for multiple celebrities’<br />
ad compare to single celebrity ad for low involvement products. When Independent sample t test is<br />
applied for single celebrity Warid ad and multiple celebrities Ufone ad (the ads for high involvement<br />
product/services) there is no significant difference for attitude toward ad, attitude toward brand and<br />
purchase intentions between single celebrity and multiple celebrities’ ad. The p value for attitude<br />
toward ad, attitude toward brand and purchase intentions are (0.175, 0.312, 0.064) which shows that<br />
there is no significant difference at 0.05% level between single celebrity ad and multiple celebrities’ ad<br />
for high involvement products/services which proved our second hypothesis.<br />
Table 3: Independent sample t test Pantene pro v shampoo ad (single celebrity ad) Lux soap ad (multiple<br />
celebrities’ ad) Low involvement products category<br />
variables Mean St. dev. t-value p-value<br />
Attitude toward ad<br />
Single celebrity<br />
Multiple celebrity<br />
4.3439<br />
4.9241<br />
1.05218<br />
1.29011<br />
-3.5068 0.002<br />
Attitude toward brand<br />
Single celebrity<br />
Multiple celebrity<br />
4.8122<br />
5.1709<br />
1.10276<br />
1.15747<br />
-1.994 0.048<br />
Purchase intentions<br />
Single celebrity<br />
Multiple celebrity<br />
3.9620<br />
4.7426<br />
1.48783<br />
1.55154<br />
-3.228 0.002<br />
Table 4: Independent sample t test Warid mobile phone connection (single celebrity ad) Ufone mobile phone<br />
connection (multiple celebrities’ ad) High involvement product category<br />
Variables Mean St. dev. t-value p-value<br />
Attitude toward ad<br />
Single celebrity<br />
Multiple celebrity<br />
4.5399<br />
4.8146<br />
1.10355<br />
1.29178<br />
-1.362 0.175<br />
Attitude toward brand<br />
Single celebrity<br />
Multiple celebrity<br />
4.8732<br />
5.0798<br />
1.25371<br />
1.16866<br />
-1.016 0.312<br />
Purchase intentions<br />
Single celebrity<br />
Multiple celebrity<br />
3.9437<br />
4.3521<br />
1.25481<br />
1.35446<br />
-1.864 0.064<br />
Discussion and Conclusion<br />
The key finding emerge from this research is that celebrities have positive impact on consumer<br />
perception when they appear in low involvement products or services ads. As the number <strong>of</strong> celebrities<br />
increases consumer perception also become more positive this is due to the fact that these ads attract<br />
different target markets at the same time (Hus & McDonald, 2002). When we have more than one<br />
celebrity in low involvement products/services ads consumer attitude is influenced due to the<br />
celebrities in those ads (Kahle & Homer, 1985).<br />
129