An Investigation Into The Rubicon Crossing

Cathartics, Didactics, or Altruism?
An Investigation into the Rubicon Crossing

of Celebrities to Vloggers as Marketing
Messengers for Beauty Brands
Sophie Tourret - MSc International Marketing - King’s College London

King’s College London MSc Dissertation Sophie Tourret
V01968
Abstract
The purpose of this dissertation was to compare the effectiveness of
beauty vloggers and celebrity endorsers as sources of marketing messages
for beauty brands. ‘Vloggers’ are a genre of bloggers who upload content
onto the Internet in video format. They are rapidly gaining in popularity
around the world, particularly in the beauty industry. Because more and more
brands are collaborating with them in the context of their marketing efforts, it
was essential to study vloggers as marketing sources and compare them with
the more traditional choice that are celebrity endorsers. Five positive source
attributes were extracted from the literature and joined in a conceptual
framework to be tested: attractiveness, credibility, legitimacy, power and
urgency.
The methodology of this dissertation was two-fold. Exploratory research
was carried out first, involving an analysis of a prominent secondary data
source as well as an extensive netnography. Insights gleamed from this first
research phase were utilised in the subsequent descriptive research involving
an online experimental questionnaire testing the five source attributes. The
population studied were English-speaking women aged 16-35.
Results indicated that vloggers displayed a significantly higher number
of positive attributes than endorsers (four and two out of five respectively). In
both cases, the majority of these attributes triggered positive reactions from
the viewer towards the message source and a potential product purchase.
However only in the context of vloggers did this positive attitude towards a
purchase evolve into a purchase intention. Overall, it can be concluded that
beauty vloggers are more effective sources of marketing messages than
celebrity endorsers for beauty brands.
More generally, this dissertation provides some preliminary answers for
beauty brand managers interested in utilising the novel and effective source
that are vloggers. Limitations and directions for future research are also
discussed.
01/09/2015 i
V01968
Acknowledgements
First and foremost I would like to thank my supervisor Jon Wilson

for his impressive expertise in the subject matter, his invaluable help
and his friendly attitude.
I would also like to thank Dr. Mukherji of King’s College London

for her ‘Research in Marketing’ module during which I learned many
concepts and techniques I used in this dissertation.
Last but certainly not least, I thank my husband Alexis for his
outstanding and unwavering moral support throughout this process.
01/09/2015 ii
V01968
Table of Contents

Section I - Introduction……………………………………………………………1
Section II – Literature Review........................................................................ 3
2.1-Blogs, Bloggers and Blog Readers................................................................ 4
2.1.1-What are Blogs? ........................................................................................ 4
2.1.2-Why Blog? .................................................................................................. 4
2.1.3-Why Read Blogs? ...................................................................................... 5
2.2-Marketing Strategies ...................................................................................... 6
2.2.1-Celebrity Marketing .................................................................................. 6
2.2.2-Blog Marketing .......................................................................................... 7
2.2.2.1-A History ........................................................................................................... 7
2.2.2.2-Pros and Cons ................................................................................................. 7
2.2.2.3-Word of Mouth ................................................................................................ 8
2.2.2.4-Opinion Leaders.............................................................................................. 9
2.3-Marketing Sources ....................................................................................... 10
2.3.1-Source Theory .......................................................................................... 10
2.3.1.1-Attractiveness................................................................................................ 11
2.3.1.2-Credibility ....................................................................................................... 11
2.3.1.3-Power ............................................................................................................. 12
2.3.2-Stakeholder Theory ................................................................................. 12
2.3.3-Conceptual Framework ......................................................................... 13
2.3.3.1-Current Evidence .......................................................................................... 14
2.3.3.2-Gaps to be Filled........................................................................................... 15
Section III – Research Design ..................................................................... 16

3.1-Research Objective and Statement........................................................... 16
3.2-Research Questions ..................................................................................... 16
3.3-Research Design .......................................................................................... 17
Section IV – Exploratory Research ............................................................. 19

4.1-Secondary Data Methodology ................................................................... 19
4.1.1-Selection and Procedure ....................................................................... 19
4.1.2-Justification .............................................................................................. 19
4.2-Netnography Methodology ........................................................................ 20
4.2.1-Justification .............................................................................................. 20
4.2.2-YouTube Channels and Videos Selection ............................................ 21
4.2.2.1-Vlogger Channels ......................................................................................... 21
4.2.2.2-Brand Channels ............................................................................................ 22
4.2.2.3-Video Selection ............................................................................................. 23
4.2.3-Data Collection ....................................................................................... 26
4.2.4-Data Analysis Procedures ...................................................................... 27
4.2.4.1-Quantitative Data ........................................................................................ 27
4.2.4.2-Qualitative Data ........................................................................................... 27
01/09/2015 iii
V01968
4.2.5-Validity and Reliability ............................................................................ 28

4.2.6-Ethical Implications ................................................................................. 28
4.3-Secondary Data Findings ............................................................................ 28
4.4-Netnography Findings ................................................................................. 30
4.4.1-Quantitative Findings .............................................................................. 30
4.4.1.1-Number of Subscribers by Channel Category .......................................... 30
4.4.1.2-Number of Video Views by Channel Category ........................................ 30
4.4.1.3-Viewer Reaction by Channel Category .................................................... 31
4.4.1.4-Viewer Reaction by Video Type ................................................................. 32
4.4.1.5-Viewer Reaction to Sponsored Vlogger Videos ....................................... 33
4.4.2-Qualitative Findings ................................................................................ 34
4.4.2.1-Video Content and Music ........................................................................... 34
4.4.2.2-Content of Viewer Comments .................................................................... 35
4.5-Insights from Exploratory Research ............................................................ 40
Section V - Descriptive Research .............................................................. 43

5.1-Research Hypotheses .................................................................................. 43
5.2-Research Method ......................................................................................... 47
5.2.1-Experimental Questionnaire .................................................................. 47
5.2.2-Justification .............................................................................................. 48
5.2.2.1-Academic Examples .................................................................................... 48
5.2.2.2-Strengths and Weaknesses .......................................................................... 49
5.2.3-Ethical Implications ................................................................................. 50
5.3-Research Instrument .................................................................................... 50
5.3.1-Questionnaire Design ............................................................................. 50
5.3.1.1-Content .......................................................................................................... 51
5.3.1.2-Format ............................................................................................................ 52
5.3.1.3-Scaling ........................................................................................................... 52
5.3.1.4-Pre-testing ...................................................................................................... 53
5.3.1.5-Possible Biases ............................................................................................... 53
5.3.2-Mode of Administration .......................................................................... 53
5.3.3-Sampling .................................................................................................. 53
5.4-Data Preparation .......................................................................................... 54
5.4.1-Exporting the Data .................................................................................. 54
5.4.2-Data Completeness................................................................................ 54
5.4.3-Data Coding............................................................................................ 56
5.5-Descriptive Statistics .................................................................................... 56
5.5.1-Demographics and Beauty Habits ....................................................... 56
5.5.2-Experience of Beauty Content on YouTube ........................................ 57
5.5.3-Perception of Message Sources............................................................ 58
5.6-Hypotheses Testing ...................................................................................... 58
5.6.1-Attributes Displayed ................................................................................ 58
5.6.1.1-Vloggers ......................................................................................................... 59
5.6.1.2-Celebrities ...................................................................................................... 61
5.6.2-Effects of Attributes ................................................................................. 63
5.6.2.1-Vloggers ......................................................................................................... 61
5.6.2.2-Celebrities ...................................................................................................... 65
01/09/2015 iv
V01968
5.6.3-Effect of Positive Attitude towards Sources ......................................... 66

5.6.3.1-Vloggers ......................................................................................................... 66
5.6.3.2-Celebrities ...................................................................................................... 68
5.6.4-Theory of Planned Behaviour................................................................. 68
5.6.4.1-Vloggers ......................................................................................................... 68
5.6.4.2-Celebrities ...................................................................................................... 69
5.6.5-Direct Effect of Attitude towards Sources ............................................ 70
5.7-Descriptive Research Findings .................................................................... 71
Section VI - Discussion ................................................................................ 72

6.1-Introduction .................................................................................................. 72
6.2-Research Questions 1&2 – Source Attributes ............................................. 72
6.2.1-Beauty Vloggers ...................................................................................... 72
6.2.2-Celebrities ................................................................................................ 73
6.2.3-Notable Differences................................................................................ 74
6.3-Research Question 3 – Attitude and Intention .......................................... 75
6.3.1-Beauty Vloggers ...................................................................................... 75
6.3.2-Celebrities ................................................................................................ 76
Section VII – Conclusion ............................................................................. 77

7.1-Conclusive Remarks .................................................................................... 77
7.2-Managerial Recommendations ................................................................. 78
7.3-Limitations ..................................................................................................... 79
7.4-Future Research ........................................................................................... 80
Section VIII - Bibliography .......................................................................... 81
01/09/2015 v
V01968
List of Figures
Figure Figure Title Page

Number
1 Literature Review Structure 3
2 Research Design 18
3 Research Model 44
4 Respondent Age Distribution (SPSS Output) 57
5 Respondent Average Monthly Spend on Beauty Products (SPSS 57
Output)
6 Hypothesis Testing Stage 1 - Before 59
7 Hypothesis Testing Stage 1 - Results 62
8 Hypothesis Testing Stage 2 - Before 63
11 Research Model Results 71
01/09/2015 vi
V01968
List of Tables
Table Table Title Page

Number
1 Conceptual Framework 14
2 Selected Findings on Celebrity Attributes 14
3 Selected Findings on Blogger Attributes 15
4 Beauty Vlogger Channels included in the Netnography 22
5 Beauty Brand Channels included in the Netnography 22
6 Videos included in the Netnography 26
7 Quantitative Data Recorded from Netnography 26
8 Qualitative Data Recorded from Netnography 26
9 Number of Subscribers by Channel Category 30
10 Number of Video Views by Channel Category 30
11 Average Viewer Reaction by Channel Category 31
12 Total Viewer Reaction by Channel Category 32
13 Average Viewer Reaction by Video Type 32
14 Average Viewer Reaction to Sponsored Vlogger Videos 33
15 Sums of Mentions of Attributes in Viewer Comments 35
16 Example Comments of High Vlogger Attractiveness 36
17 Example Comments of Low Brand Trustworthiness 36
18 Example Comments of High Vlogger Expertise 37
19 Examples of Negative Comments on Vlogger Videos 37
20 Example Comments of High Vlogger Trustworthiness 37
21 Example Comment of High Celebrity Legitimacy 38
22 Example Comments of High Vlogger Legitimacy 38
23 Example Comments of Medium Brand Power 39
24 Example Comments of High Vlogger Power 39
25 Example Comments of High Vlogger Urgency 39
26 Summary Table of Attribute Mentions in Viewer Comments 40
27 Research Hypotheses 47
28 Links between Research Questions and Hypotheses 47
29 Experimental Questionnaire Process 48
30 Examples of Articles Using Experimental Questionnaire Method 49
01/09/2015 vii
V01968
31 Examples of Articles Using the Experimental Questionnaire 49

Method Online
32 Links between Survey Questions and Hypotheses 52
33 Intended Research Population 54
34 "H17_Brand_URG” Descriptive Statistics – SPSS Output 55
35 Answer Distribution to Survey Q49 58
36 H1a single mean t-test – SPSS Output 60
37 H1b-H5 single mean t-tests – Results 61
38 H13a-H17 single mean t-tests – Results 61
39 H6a single mean t-tests – SPSS Output 64
40 H6b-H9 single mean t-tests – Results 65
41 H18a-H20 single mean t-tests – Results 65
42 H11 Chi-square test – SPSS Output 67
43 H11 Phi and Cramer’s V values – SPSS Output 68
44 H12a Chi-square test – SPSS Output 69
45 Complete Conceptual Framework 77
01/09/2015 viii
V01968
List of Appendices
Appendix Appendix Title Page

Number
1 Full Vlogger Profiles 87
2 Full Brand Profiles 89
3 Netnography Recording 91
4 Experimental Questionnaire 93
5 SPPS Variable View 105
6 SPSS Outputs for Section 5.6.1.1 109
01/09/2015 ix

V01968
Section I -‐ Introduction

Any successful marketing communications strategy should make sure
to use an effective source to increase the persuasiveness of its message. For
decades, brands’ main choice of non-corporate sources was celebrities
through endorsement contracts. These celebrities made for persuasive
marketing messengers thanks to their undeniable physical attractiveness, high
likability and strong influence (Kahle and Homer, 1985; Ohanian, 1990;
Goldsmith et al., 2000). Examples of this marketing communications strategy
abound: Brad Pitt for Chanel, Catherine Zeta-Jones for T-Mobile and Tiger
Woods for Accenture, to name a few.
However, as celebrity scandals and broken contracts grew more and
more widespread (eg. Accenture ending Tiger Woods’ contract after the
revelation of his infidelities), brands became weary of this strategy. Moreover,
the rise of postmodernism (Firat et al., 1995) meant that endorsements were
increasingly met with scepticism and exasperation from consumers. Instead,
they were turning to the growing information source that was the Internet. The
volume and variety of online forums exploded, and many consumers wrote
and consulted online peer reviews to guide their purchase behaviours
(Bickhart and Schindler, 2001; Hennig-Thurau et al., 2004; Cheung et al., 2009;
Lee and Youn, 2009). Bloggers then came into play and became influencers
in consumers’ purchase decision processes worldwide (Carl, 2006; Hsu and
Lin, 2008; Armstrong and McAdams, 2009; Dhar and Chang, 2009; Aggarwal
and Singh, 2013).
Recently, a new kind of bloggers named ‘vloggers’ (video-bloggers)
has drastically risen in popularity. Vloggers create and post videos online,
01/09/2015 1
V01968
primarily on YouTube (www.youtube.com) about their lives, their hobbies and
areas of expertise. In the beauty-sphere, vloggers are an increasingly popular
source of information and tips, and many have grown to boast over a million
subscribers and several million views on YouTube (Pixability Inc., 2014). Famous
examples include Zoella (8 million subscribers), Tanya Burr (3 million) and
SprinkleofGlitter (2 million). It is time for beauty brands to pay attention to
these new powerful message sources and perhaps incorporate them into
their marketing communications strategy.
To aid them in this endeavour, this study follows the theoretical lens of
Kelman’s source theory (1961) and Freeman’s stakeholder theory (1984) to
identify key source attributes. It then draws them together in a conceptual
framework and tests the hypothesised relationships through the use of
exploratory research and an experimental survey. Conclusions about
celebrities and vloggers as marketing sources for beauty brands as well as
managerial recommendations are then discussed.
01/09/2015 2
V01968
Section II – Literature Review

‘Vlogs’ are a recent phenomenon and very little research therefore
exists on this nascent topic. However, a considerable amount of research
does exist on blogs, bloggers and blog readers. The literature review will firstly
analyse this research and extrapolate its findings to the sub-category of
bloggers that are vloggers. The rise of blog marketing will then be defined
and contrasted with traditional celebrity marketing strategies, and its
grounding in the theories of word-of-mouth and opinion leaders will be
examined. This literature review will then culminate in the creation of a
conceptual framework for the analysis of marketing sources, built on source
and stakeholder theories respectively. Current knowledge on celebrities and
bloggers as marketing sources will be examined in the context of this
framework, before identifying the notable gaps in the literature (Fig.1).
Figure 1: Literature Review Structure
01/09/2015 3
V01968
2.1-‐Blogs, Bloggers and Blog Readers
2.1.1-‐What are Blogs?
Most academics agree that the first blogs (or weblogs) appeared in
the late 1990’s. The term ‘weblog’ was coined by pioneer blogger John
Barger for a webpage on which one ‘logs’ other webpages he or she finds
interesting (Dearstyne, 2005). However blogs quickly gained in popularity and
their uses grew exponentially thanks to their hybrid format (Herring et al.,
2005). One of the most prevalent uses to come out of this evolution was the
online personal journal, which avid bloggers updated daily (ibid.). It is this
format that is now most commonly associated with the term.
2.1.2-‐Why Blog?
Of the many theories put forth as explanations for blogging behaviour,
two stand out in the literature. Firstly, Katz et al.’s (1973) Gratification Theory
has been used to explain that blogging enables certain gratifications,
primarily self-expression, life documenting, expressing emotion, commenting
and finally forming communities (Nardi et al., 2004; Huang et al., 2007). Social
gratification, that is to say interaction with readers and other bloggers, is often
found to be the main motivation for blogging (Hsu and Lin, 2008; Sepp et al.,
2011). Similarly, YouTube provides vloggers this social interaction by enabling
them to see and reply to viewers’ comments on each video.
Self-presentation theory also offers an interesting outlook on blogging
behaviour. In 2013, Belk revisited his seminal theory of the ‘extended self’ after
observing significant changes to the self-concept due to the proliferation of
digital technologies. He argued that individuals now present themselves via a
01/09/2015 4
V01968
large number of online avatars, thus negating the idea of the core self. These
online personas have a strong influence over our offline sense of self.
Moreover, Belk (2013) found that digital technologies have led to an
increased disclosure of private life online, transforming the self into a co-
constructed concept with other online individuals who offer instantaneous
feedback. Bloggers clearly embody this online construction of the self; they
present digital collages of themselves via their blog, in order to be perceived
by others exactly how they wish to be (Schau and Gilly, 2003). Fyrat and
Vicdan (2008) took this even further by arguing that blogs and YouTube
enable trendsetting individuals to achieve ‘brand’ or iconic status through
online self-construction. Vloggers are a clear example of this development, as
many have now reached ‘star’ status (eg. Zoella, Tyler Oakley) and the online
selves they have constructed induce fervour in their millions of subscribers.
2.1.3-‐Why Read Blogs?
In parallel, blog readers have also been widely studied. Some
researchers have focused on their rational motivations, arguing that blog
readers seek information, convenience and cognition (Korgaonkar and
Wolin, 1999; Kaye, 2005). However other studies have discovered a more
emotional side to reading blogs. For example, by adopting an experiential
value perspective, Keng and Ting (2009) found several positive experiences
derived from blogs including aesthetics (entertainment and sensory pleasure),
playfulness (an escape from daily life) and service excellence (the blogger’s
expertise). Vlog viewers may also enjoy these three values. Vlogs are
entertaining and even stimulate a novel sense (hearing); they help viewers
01/09/2015 5
V01968
escape daily life by enabling projection into the vlogger’s life, and often offer
sound advice and knowledge on topics of interest to the viewer.
2.2-‐Marketing Strategies
2.2.1-‐Celebrity Marketing
Brands have made use of celebrity endorsements for decades,
particularly as advertising tactics (Kaikati, 1987; Erdogan, 1999; Amos et al.,
2008). In fact around 25% of American companies utilise celebrities in their
commercials (Shimp, 2000). Studies have demonstrated positive effects of
celebrity endorsements on generating interest and attracting attention
(Ohanian, 1991). Financial gains have also been documented, as was the
case for Nike following Tiger Woods’ endorsement (Farrell et al., 2000).
However, evidence of celebrity marketing’s effectiveness is still limited.
Going back to the Tiger Woods case study, his endorsement caused no
financial gains for his other sponsor American Express (ibid.), showing that
success for this strategy is context-dependent and volatile. Goldsmith et al.
(2000) also found that endorsements only had a positive effect on consumers’
attitude towards advertisements and not brands, demonstrating the limited
horizon of this strategy. Finally, Tripp et al. (1994) argued that increased
exposure to celebrities could even create a negative attitude towards
advertisements.
01/09/2015 6
V01968
2.2.2-‐Blog Marketing
2.2.2.1-‐A History
Initially, blog marketing efforts by brands were purely defensive, after
realising that the millions of blogs in existence could damage reputation in an
instant. In the early 2000’s, blogs were an increasingly powerful information
source, due to their ease of accessibility and speed of diffusion. However
some bloggers failed to verify facts before publishing posts, meaning product
and corporate reputations could be unfairly destroyed (Pikas, 2005).
Researchers therefore advocated defensive blog mining, in order to track
opinions and take action in case of wrongful blog posts (ibid.). Blog marketing
then took on a more proactive stance, and blog mining became a process
for scouting business intelligence within user communities (Chau and Xu,
2012). However both defensive and proactive blog mining remained purely
internal processes.
Brands eventually turned outwards and grew to involve the blogging
community in their marketing strategies. This led to the development of
‘consumer-generated advertising’ or ‘sponsored content’, in the form of
monetised blog posts (Mutum and Wang, 2010). This trend grew rapidly in
many blogospheres including technology, beauty and fashion, and countless
brands pay bloggers to perform as ‘buzz’ agents online (Carl, 2006; Kulmala
et al., 2013). With their millions of subscribers, vloggers are now an attractive
new pool of buzz agents for brands.
2.2.2.2-‐Pros and Cons
Many researchers have provided evidence for the positive effects of
blog marketing on the consumer decision process. Aggarwal and Singh
01/09/2015 7
V01968
(2013) found that many consumers turned to blogs during the screening stage
to simplify decision-making. When comparing blogs to offline media,
Colliander and Dahlén (2011) found higher persuasiveness in blogs in early
stages of the process. Blog posts also positively influence the purchase stage
of the decision process, as evidenced by Dhar and Chang (2009) finding a
correlation between blog post volume and sales for music albums. Through
their online survey of blog users, Hsu et al. (2013) found the greatest effect
overall and concluded that blogs influence all five stages of the consumer
decision process for online shopping by affecting attitudes as well as
intentions.
However researchers have also warned brands to proceed with
caution: “firms need to investigate carefully how to address these
independent but powerful actors” (Sepp et al., 2011, p.1479). Studies have
found that sponsored content on blogs must match the blogger’s organic
style and usual interests in order to avoid strong backlash and resentment
from readers (Kulmala et al., 2013). Brands must also be aware that bloggers
will inevitably transform marketing messages when acting as buzz agents, by
incorporating the messages into their own narratives (Kozinets et al., 2010).
Blog and vlog marketing can therefore be a powerful strategy but must be
carefully executed.
2.2.2.3-‐Word of Mouth
Blog marketing is largely founded on the long-standing principle of
word-of-mouth (WOM), defined in Arndt’s (1967) seminal paper as face-to-
face communication about a brand or product. WOM differs from advertising
in its ephemeral, spontaneous and collaborative nature (Stern, 1994). Many
researchers have offered evidence that individuals are largely impacted by

01/09/2015 8
V01968
reference groups’ WOM (Childers and Rao, 1992), particularly for brand
decisions (Bearden and Etzel, 1982). Specifically, Arndt (1967) found that over
half of individuals exposed to favourable WOM about a product had then
purchased that product. Two mediating factors in the relationship between
WOM and purchase behavior have also been revealed, namely tie strength
(Brown and Reingen, 1987; De Bruyn and Lilien, 2008) and level of perceived
risk (Arndt, 1967).
WOM entered the online world as early as the 1990’s (Buttle, 1998), and
the term ‘eWOM’ was quickly coined. Hennig-Thurau et al. (2004) defined
eWOM as “any positive or negative statement made by potential, actual, or
former customers about a product or company, which is made available to a
multitude of people and institutions via the Internet” (p.39). Although millions
of individuals engage in eWOM exchanges across the world every day
(Thorson and Rodgers, 2006), eWOM still represents only a tiny portion of
overall WOM at 10% (Carl, 2006). Its influence on consumer behavior has
however been demonstrated, for example by Senecal and Nantel (2004)
who found that individuals exposed to eWOM were twice as likely to
purchase a product than non-exposed individuals.
2.2.2.4-‐Opinion Leaders
Opinion leaders were first identified by Katz and Lazarsfeld (1970) in
their two-step flow of communication model, in which information flows from
the media to opinion leaders and finally to the mass public. Opinion
leadership is integral part to WOM, and has been a prevalent part of many
brands’ marketing strategies (Summers, 1970): by targeting opinion leaders,
brands can effectively strengthen and amplify their message.
01/09/2015 9
V01968
The advent of the Internet has undeniably boosted the influence of
opinion leaders by providing them with increasingly efficient ways of
disseminating information (Sun et al., 2006). Just like its offline counterpart,
eWOM is dominated by powerful opinion leaders. Many studies have
identified bloggers as self-selected online opinion leaders who significantly
influence their large followings (Carl, 2006; Mutum and Wang, 2010; Chau
and Xu, 2012). These e-opinion leaders mediate official brand
communications and therefore need to be carefully managed (Kozinets,
1999).
2.3-‐Marketing Sources
2.3.1-‐Source Theory
“Since Aristotle's time (or before), politicians, orators, and public
speakers have attempted to identify the determinant qualities of effective
speakers” (Ohanian, 1990, p.39). Understanding source effectiveness and
consequently message persuasiveness is of crucial importance to brands
when selecting marketing and advertising tactics. The source of a message
can be as important if not more than the message itself. This fact now holds
true on the Internet as well, where consumers are majorly influenced in their
purchase behaviours by online sources (Senecal and Nantel, 2004).
For over 50 years, Kelman’s source theory has enlightened and guided
this research field. In his 1961 “Processes of Opinion Change” article, Kelman
identified three source attributes which encourage individuals’ adoption of
opinions, as mediated by three internal processes. He proved that sources’
‘Attractiveness’ prompts ‘Identification’ (or mimicry); sources’ ‘Credibility’
01/09/2015 10
V01968
drives ‘Internationalisation’ (belief); and sources’ ‘Power’ provokes
‘Compliance’ (obedience). This seminal article has been cited over 2,000
times since.
2.3.1.1-‐Attractiveness
In 1961, Kelman defined attractiveness as the desirability of a lasting
relationship. Two decades later, McGuire (1985) defined attractiveness more
precisely as composed of ‘Likability’, ‘Similarity’ and ‘Familiarity’ to the
message recipient. The first component, likability, has been found to increase
message persuasiveness the most, all the while mediated by sources’
‘Physical Attractiveness’ (Snyder and Rothbart, 1971; Chaiken, 1979; Patzer,
1983).
2.3.1.2-‐Credibility
Kelman’s (1961) definition of credibility was inspired by Hovland et al.’s
(1953) delineation into ‘Expertise’ and ‘Trustworthiness’. While expertise refers
to the validity of the source’s assertions, trustworthiness raises the issue of the
source’s intentions when communicating.
Over the years, credibility has certainly been the most analysed of the
three attributes. Its two components have been independently studied, and
contrasting results have come to light. Whereas Andersen and Clevenger
(1963) found in their meta-analysis that expertise had a higher effect on
message persuasiveness than trustworthiness, McGinnies and Ward (1980)
found the opposite to be true. Overall, Wiener and Mowen (1986)
demonstrated that the two components of credibility often operate
independently.
01/09/2015 11
V01968
As a whole, source credibility has been found to positively change
opinions (Hovland and Weiss, 1951), influence attitudes (Dholakia and
Sternthal, 1977) and minimise perceptions of risk (Grewal et al., 1994). Its most
significant effect has been found to be the alleviation of the knowledge and
reporting biases as identified by Eagly et al. (1978). By disconfirming
recipients’ expectations of the source’s opinion or ideological position, that
source can increase its credibility and thus improve message persuasiveness
(Koeske and Crano, 1968).
In more recent years, the effect of advertisements on source credibility
has been studied. Interestingly, it has been found that the presence of
advertisements on or near online sources does not decrease credibility
(Greer, 2003), but in fact acts as a ‘stamp of approval’, particularly on
YouTube (Kim, 2012).
2.3.1.3-‐Power
Power has always been an elusive concept in the literature. Kelman
(1961) envisioned it as a combination of reward and punishment, both of
which have been found to have a positive effect on recipient cooperation
(Balliet et al., 2011). However Turner’s (2005) broader definition presents
power as a wider concept similar to ‘Influence’: “the capacity to cause
effects, to have an impact on or change things” (p.2).
2.3.2-‐Stakeholder Theory
Power is also part of the renowned Stakeholder model, first put forth by
Freeman (1984) when identifying individuals and groups of interest to
corporations. “Just as stockholders have a right to demand certain actions by
management, so do other stakeholders have a right to make claims”
01/09/2015 12
V01968
(Freeman, 2011, p.41). There are two approaches to this theory, broad or
narrow, depending on how wide a net is cast in identifying influencers and
dependents of the organisation (Wilson, 2012).
In 1997, Mitchell et al. made a major contribution to the field with their
Stakeholder Typology which identified three key attributes to aid stakeholder
identification: power, ‘Legitimacy’ and ‘Urgency’. As power has already
been explored by source theory, the two latter attributes are defined below
and applied to a source and recipient context.
Legitimacy stems from having a legal or moral claim on the
organisation (Clarkson, 1995) or message recipient in the wider sense.
Legitimate sources perform an appropriate or even desirable action in the
eyes of the recipient. As for urgency, the attribute refers to the time-sensitivity
and criticality or importance of the source’s message for the recipient, in that
the message requires immediate attention (cf. Mitchell et al., 1997).
2.3.3-‐Conceptual Framework
Bringing the two theories together allows us to build an informed
framework with which to evaluate vloggers and celebrities as marketing
message sources for beauty brands (Table 1). Final sub-attributes or definitions
are given for each attribute. The question marks are placeholders for the
subsequent research findings (cf. Table 45 in the Conclusion section) Current
academic findings on celebrities and vloggers/bloggers as marketing sources
are presented below.
01/09/2015 13
V01968
Source Attribute Definition Vloggers Celebrities

Attractiveness Likability, Familiarity, Similarity & ? ?
Physical Attractiveness
Credibility Expertise & Trustworthiness ? ?
Legitimacy Performing appropriate or desirable ? ?
action
Power Influence ? ?
Urgency Time-sensitivity, criticality ? ?
Table 1: Conceptual Framework
2.3.3.1-‐Current Evidence
Relevant findings to date on celebrities’ and bloggers’ source
attributes are summarised in Tables 2 and 3 respectively.
Celebrity Do they What is its effect? Reference

Sub-Attribute display it?
Physical Yes No effect, because so common Ohanian, 1991
Attractiveness for celebrities
Yes Influences attitudes and Kahle and Homer,
purchase intentions 1985;
Amos et al., 2008
Likability Yes Favourable peripheral cue in Petty et al., 1983
advertising
Expertise Yes Influences purchase intentions Ohanian, 1991;
Amos et al., 2008
Trustworthiness No - Ohanian, 1991
Yes Influences attitudes and Amos et al., 2008
intentions
Yes Only influences attitude towards Goldsmith et al.,
the advertisement, not the 2000
brand or product
Table 2: Selected Findings on Celebrity Attributes
01/09/2015 14
V01968
Blogger Do they What is its effect? Reference

(Sub)Attribute display it?
Credibility Yes Influences attitudes and Bickhart and Schindler,
intentions 2001; Armstrong and
McAdams, 2009;
Johnson and Kaye,
2009;
No - Lee and Youn, 2009
Similarity Yes Stronger connection with Keng and Ting, 2009
readers
Power, Urgency Yes As ‘social networkers’ and Sedereviciute and
and Legitimacy ‘concerned influencers’, Valentini, 2011; Wilson,
bloggers communicate 2012
Table 3: Selected Findings on Blogger Attributes
2.3.3.2-‐Gaps to be Filled
Although celebrities have received more academic attention than
bloggers so far, Table 2 demonstrates that findings are mixed as well as
scarce for some sub-attributes. As for bloggers, Table 3 reveals promising
findings, with several studies identifying them as key sources demonstrating
multiple sub-attributes. However, this research area is still nascent and missing
evidence on many sub-attributes. This dissertation will therefore attempt to
gather evidence on all five source attributes (nine sub-attributes in total) for
both celebrities and vloggers, in a holistic research model. Moreover, as
research on vloggers is even scarcer than research on bloggers, this
dissertation will help grow this new field.
01/09/2015 15
V01968
Section III – Research Design

3.1-‐Research Objective and Statement
The rise of beauty vloggers presents an unmissable opportunity for
beauty brand managers. These new sources boast millions of YouTube
subscribers and their popularity is continuously growing. The objective of this
research was therefore to fully analyse beauty vloggers as sources of
marketing messages for beauty brands, in order to understand and compare
their effectiveness to that of traditional celebrity endorsers. The overarching
research statement was:
How do beauty vloggers and celebrity endorsers
compare as marketing sources for beauty brands?

3.2-‐Research Questions
The following research questions aimed to fully explore the five source
attributes discovered in the literature with regards to beauty vloggers and
celebrity endorsers, in order to fulfil our research statement.
Research Questions 1&2-‐Source Attributes
RQ1a: What source attributes do beauty vloggers display? Which attributes
are most prevalent?
01/09/2015 16
V01968
RQ1b: What source attributes do celebrity endorsers display? Which attributes
are most prevalent?
RQ2: What are the notable differences between beauty vloggers and
celebrity endorsers in terms of source attributes?
Research Question 3-‐Viewer Attitude and Behavior
RQ3a: What impact do beauty vloggers’ attributes have on the viewers’
attitude and purchase intention?
RQ3b: What impact do celebrity endorsers’ attributes have on the viewers’
attitude and purchase intention?
3.3-‐Research Design
Because the rise of beauty vloggers was so recent, exploratory
research was essential to fully understanding the phenomenon. This first phase
was carried out in two steps: secondary data analysis and a netnography.
The qualitative insights gained were then used to formulate testable
hypotheses and construct an experimental questionnaire in the descriptive
research phase in order to obtain quantitative data (Fig.2). Adopting a
mixed-methods approach ensured thorough data collection by using the
strengths of both quantitative and qualitative research (Aaker et al., 2012).
The two following sections (IV and V) detail the methodology and findings of
both research phases.
01/09/2015 17
V01968
Figure 2: Research Design
01/09/2015 18
V01968
Section IV – Exploratory Research

4.1-‐Secondary Data Methodology
4.1.1-‐Selection and Procedure
As previously mentioned, the vlogging phenomenon is extremely
recent, and as such, few reliable sources have published data on the subject.
One extensive report was however found, published by Pixability Inc. (2014), a
YouTube marketing platform provider. The report has been cited by many
news and magazine articles and become a reference within this nascent
field. This secondary source was thoroughly read and analysed, and relevant
data were extracted.
4.1.2-‐Justification
Using a secondary data source presented certain advantages for this
research. It provided a valuable first look into the vlogging phenomenon
without having to collect primary data. It also guided the second phase of
exploratory research, for example by listing the most popular vlogger
channels to observe. However, secondary data does suffer from some
limitations, namely possible obsolescence and biases (Aaker et al., 2012).
However, the Pixability Inc. (2014) report was extremely recent, and the
researcher took into consideration biases resulting from the report publisher’s
involvement in the YouTube industry.
01/09/2015 19
V01968
4.2-‐Netnography Methodology
Netnography is a relatively new qualitative research methodology,
consisting of an Internet-based (or ‘net’) ethnography. It is founded on the
concepts and procedures of traditional ethnography, extending them into
the realm of computer-mediated communications (Bowler, 2010). As its
pioneer and fiercest advocator, Kozinets (2002; 2010) has detailed its many
advantages. A netnography allows for the unobtrusive gathering of data and
observation of attitudes and behaviours relevant to the research question.
This method also makes effective use of the wealth of data that already exist
online, ready to be collected. Most importantly, for an entirely web-based
phenomenon such as YouTube videos, it is the most appropriate if not the
only methodology to follow. In fact it has been the chosen methodology of
various studies of online phenomena and communities (e.g. Nelson and
Otnes, 2005) and particularly bloggers (e.g. DeValck and Kretz, 2011; Kulmala
et al., 2013). Of course, netnographies suffer from the same limitations as
traditional qualitative methodologies, particularly subjective interpretation
and reliance on the observer’s skills (Aaker et al., 2012). This is why all the
collected data were meticulously analysed, using a consistent coding system
throughout. The netnography was also conducted over two weeks, to avoid
fatigue and carelessness.
Kozinets (2010) outlines two approaches to netnographies, namely an
observant ‘lurker’ approach and a participative approach. The former was
chosen, as YouTube beauty communities are usually focussed on one
01/09/2015 20
V01968
member, the ‘YouTuber’, and interaction is rather limited. Pure observation
was therefore sufficient to the exploratory research phase.
4.2.2-‐YouTube Channels and Videos Selection
To be suitable for netnographies, Kozinets (2010) insists that
communities be: relevant to the research question, regularly active,
interactive, substantial, heterogeneous and data-rich. The YouTube beauty
community presents all these features: it is highly relevant to research
comparing vlogger and celebrity YouTube videos, regularly comments and
interacts, provides a large amount of quantitative and qualitative data and is
highly heterogeneous. Beauty vlogger viewers are of different genders, ages
and nationalities (as demonstrated by their user names, language and profile
pictures).
4.2.2.1-‐Vlogger Channels
The procedure for selecting vlogger channels to observe was:
1. The twenty most popular UK beauty vlogger channels were determined via
secondary data
2. Figures for subscribers were sorted from largest to smallest
3. The top eight beauty channels were kept
This procedure was chosen as the most subscribed channels would
most effectively represent the positive attributes of vloggers.
The resulting eight channels are listed in Table 4 in descending order of
number of subscribers (see vlogger profiles in Appendix 1):
Beauty Vlogger Channel Coded as
Zoella V1
Tanya Burr V2
01/09/2015 21
V01968
Sprinkle of Glitter V3
PixiWoo V4
Beauty Crush V5
Fleur de Force V6
Lisa Eldridge V7
Essie Button V8
Table 4: Beauty Vlogger Channels included in the Netnography
4.2.2.2-‐Brand Channels
The procedure for selecting brand channels was less straightforward,
as it was soon discovered that only a few beauty brands utilised celebrity
endorsements on YouTube. Only channels presenting this feature were
selected, and again sorted by amount of subscribers. The resulting eight
channels are listed in Table 5 in descending order of number of subscribers
(see brand profiles in Appendix 2):
Beauty Brand Channel Coded as
Chanel B1
Christian Dior B2
CoverGirl B3
Maybelline New York B4
Bobbi Brown Cosmetics B5
Rimmel London B6
l’Oréal Paris UK & Ireland B7
Revlon B8
Table 5: Beauty Brand Channels included in the Netnography
01/09/2015 22
V01968
4.2.2.3-‐Video Selection
Five videos were selected for observation from each channel, resulting
in 80 videos in total (Table 6). Videos were chosen from the channels’ ‘Most
Popular’ sections, all the while making sure they represented a mix of video
types. All videos were beauty-related (defined by secondary data as relating
to make-up, skincare, haircare, hair styling, nails and/or fragrance). Videos
were also at least one month old, in order for most viewer reaction to have
occurred.
Channel Title Date
B1 PERFECTION LUMIÈRE VELVET - CHANEL 08/04/14
B1 ROUGE ALLURE GLOSS: intense color, lacquered shine - CHANEL 08/10/14
B1 Summer 2015 Makeup: COLLECTION MEDITÉRANNÉE - CHANEL 22/05/15
B1 ROUGE COCO film with Keira Knightley: featuring the "Gabrielle" shade 03/04/15
B1 LES BEIGES: Natural is a style, day and night - CHANEL 28/03/14
B2 Dior J'adore - "The future is gold" - The new film 02/09/14
B2 Miss Dior - The new film (Official) 04/02/15
B2 Rouge Dior Brillant - The film 31/03/15
B2 Miss Dior - Making-of & Natalie Portman interview (Official) 06/02/15
B2 J'adore 'Le Parfum' - The Film 25/11/13
B3 Sofia Vergara, Janelle Monáe,P!nk - Find the Best Foundation Make Up 26/02/15
B3 truBLEND Commercial ft. P!NK, Janelle Monaé and Sofia Vergara | 15/01/14
B3 Katy Perry: #instaGLAM Collection Commercial 25/04/14
B3 Sofia Vergara: The Making of a Bombshell 26/01/14
B3 Makeup Looks from "Shower" Music Video with Becky G 27/06/14
B4 NO MAYBES by MaybellineNewYork – feat. Gigi Hadid and Ruby Rose 15/05/15
B4 Dare to go Nude with Jourdan Dunn and Devon Aoki 14/07/14
B4 Fit Me Matte + Poreless Foundation from Maybelline New York 27/02/15
B4 Fit Me Foundation From Maybelline New York 04/02/11
01/09/2015 23
V01968
B4 Christy Turlington - Lash Sensational Mascara by Maybelline New York 19/12/14
B5 New Intensive Skin Serum Foundation -- by Bobbi Brown 15/04/15
B5 How-To: Instant Pretty with Kate Upton 04/02/15
B5 How-To: Secret to Perfect Skin with Kate Upton 11/02/15
B5 New Long-Wear Collection -- by Bobbi Brown 08/04/15
B5 How-To: Instant Pretty with Kate Upton and Bobbi Brown 02/04/15
B6 Colour Fest Collection TV Ad Feat. Rita Ora | Rimmel London 13/04/15
B6 Perrie Little Mix Makeup Tutorial 12/12/11
B6 Lasting Finish by Kate Lipstick TV Ad Feat. Kate Moss | Rimmel London 02/10/12
B6 Lasting Finish 25HR Foundation TV Ad feat. Georgia May Jagger 05/09/14
B6 Jade Little Mix Makeup Tutorial 29/11/11
B7 Blackbuster TV Ad featuring Barbara Palvin 04/07/13
B7 Studio Line #TXT Volume Supersizing Spray TV Ad with Barbara Palvin 08/10/13
B7 New L'Oréal Paris Skin Perfection Skincare TV Ad featuring Cheryl Cole 09/08/13
B7 L'Oréal Paris behind the scenes at the Elnett TV shoot with Cheryl 20/05/11
B7 Helen Mirren stars in the NEW Age Perfect TV Advert from L'Oréal Paris 06/02/15
B8 NEW Revlon Ultra HD Lipstick 19/01/15
B8 Halle Berry and Olivia Wilde on Love 25/03/15
B8 Introducing Revlon Bold Lacquer Mascara 22/05/14
B8 Behind The Scenes: Revlon ColorBurst Lip Butter with Emma Stone 07/02/12
B8 Emma Stone for Revlon Nearly Naked Makeup 15/01/13
V1 How To: My Quick and Easy Hairstyles 05/06/13
V1 My Everyday Makeup Routine 23/05/13
V1 Skincare Chat & Natural Makeup Look 02/07/14
V1 My Autumn and Winter Essentials 14/10/13
V1 September Favourites 30/10/13
V2 Emma Stone Flawless Skin Makeup Tutorial! ad 19/04/15
V2 Selena Gomez Everyday Makeup Tutorial! 25/01/15
V2 Everyday Makeup For Glasses Wearers! ad 04/06/14
V2 Get Ready With Me: My Bedtime Routine! 21/06/13
01/09/2015 24
V01968
V2 May Favourites 2014! 25/05/14
V3 Get Ready With Me Zoella Beauty 28/09/14
V3 My 2014 Makeup Bag 05/01/14
V3 Your Starter Makeup Kit 03/11/14
V3 Awful Lip Products! 21/08/12
V3 Current Top Favourites feat. Baby Glitter! AD 06/05/15
V4 Angelina Jolie Makeup Tutorial 17/11/11
V4 Bella (Kristen Stewart) 'Breaking Dawn' Makeup Tutorial 18/01/13
V4 My BAFTA Red Carpet Makeup Tutorial #Ad 11/02/15
V4 Cat Eyes for Hooded Lids - how to wear winged eyeliner 20/03/15
V4 FAVOURITE PRODUCTS - SKINCARE, MAKEUP & HAIR 23/01/15
V5 My Morning Routine! 26/09/13
V5 Get Ready With Me ♡ Spring Makeup & Outfit 12/05/13
V5 Natural & Nude Makeup tutorial ♡ 20/11/12
V5 Quick Summer Curly Hairstyles 17/07/13
V5 My Summer & Beach Essentials ♡ | ad 23/07/13
V6 Best & Worst: NARS Products 24/02/12
V6 Get Ready With Me: Autumn Day Out! 25/09/12
V6 My Top 6 High-End Foundations 30/07/12
V6 My Evening Skin Care Routine | ad 23/01/15
V6 Get Ready with Me: DATE NIGHT with Mike | ad 26/01/15
V7 PMS Face - Skincare and Beauty Tips (Girl chat!) 06/09/13
V7 First Date Makeup Tutorial 10/12/10
V7 Acne/Blemish Covering Makeup - Foundation & Concealer Tutorial 26/10/10
V7 'No MakeUp' Look MakeUp Tutorial 20/06/11
V7 Classic Smokey Eye Tutorial 25/05/13
V8 How To: Messy Curls for Short Hair 13/08/13
V8 My Festive Cozy Night In Routine! - AD 04/12/14
V8 'No Makeup' Drugstore Makeup Tutorial 19/03/15
V8 Current Drugstore Favourites! 16/02/15
01/09/2015 25
V01968
V8 Vintage Inspired Christmas Party Hair - AD 22/12/14
Table 6: Videos included in the Netnography
4.2.3-‐Data Collection
The sixteen channels were observed one by one, and relevant data
were collected about their number of subscribers, total number of video
views and time active on YouTube. For brand channels, their choice of
celebrities was also logged.
The 80 videos were then observed over the course of two weeks. For
each video, quantitative (Table 7) and qualitative data (Table 8) were
recorded.
Quantitative Data
Upload Date (DD/MM/YY)
Length (MM:SS)
Video Type
Sponsorship: Yes/ No?
Number of Views
Number of Likes and Dislikes
Number of Comments
Table 7: Quantitative Data Recorded from Netnography
Qualitative Data
Video Content
Music Genre
Viewers’ Comments Content
Table 8: Qualitative Data Recorded from Netnography
01/09/2015 26
V01968
The software used for the netnography data collection, coding and
analysis was Microsoft Excel. The full netnography recording can be found in
Appendix 3. All data collected were accurate as of June 2015.
4.2.4-‐Data Analysis Procedures
4.2.4.1-‐Quantitative Data
All quantitative data were numbers, except for Video Type, which was
coded as ‘TUT’ for tutorials, ‘PR’ for Product reviews, ‘AD’ for Advertisements
and ‘BTS’ for ‘Behind-the-Scenes’; and Sponsorship which was coded as
‘YES’/’NO’.
The quantitative data allowed for interesting comparisons between
brand and vlogger videos. Figures such as average number of subscribers,
average number of video views, and average number of likes and dislikes
were computed and compared across the two different channel categories,
as well as across video types within channel categories.
4.2.4.2-‐Qualitative Data
For the qualitative data, music genre was coded as ‘rock’, ‘pop rock’,
‘jazz’, ‘classical’, ‘dance’, ‘ambiance’ or ‘NO’. Video content was analysed
in terms of the celebrity or vlogger’s attitude, behavior, and editing choices.
The most revealing qualitative data were the contents of viewer
comments. These were thoroughly analysed in order to categorise main
words and phrases relating to each of the five source attributes defined
earlier. The five attributes were coded as ATT (Attractiveness), CRED
(Credibility), LEG (Legitimacy), POW (Power) and URG (Urgency).
For example, a comment such as “This really helped, thank you so
much” indicated LEG. Comments could score High or Low on each attribute
01/09/2015 27
V01968
(with Low scores coded as LCRED for Credibility for example). Finally, four to
five comments were extracted from each video to illustrate main trends.
4.2.5-‐Validity and Reliability
The netnography allowed for the comparison of vlogger and celebrity
YouTube videos, in terms of content and viewer reaction. Its validity is
therefore undeniable, as it provided valuable insight into the research
problem.
Every video was viewed and analysed twice, at a week’s interval, to
ensure consistency of data collection and interpretation and limit the
inevitable subjectivity and recorder fatigue of observation as a research
method as much as possible. The two recordings were then compared and
contrasted, and only accurate results were retained. This procedure
improved the reliability of the netnography.
4.2.6-‐Ethical Implications
All observations entail ethical challenges, namely in terms of
participant awareness and consent. This netnography was deemed ethical,
as all data collected already existed in the public domain on the Internet.
Moreover, viewer anonymity was preserved as no names or usernames were
disclosed.
4.3-‐Secondary Data Findings
The Pixability Inc. (2014) report presented statistics about the YouTube
practices of 168 beauty brands and 45,000 beauty vloggers as of December
2013. Our analysis of these data revealed interesting findings detailed below.
01/09/2015 28
V01968
Beauty Videos
Secondary data revealed that beauty videos represent a significant
portion of all content on YouTube. The equivalent of over 75 hours of beauty-
related videos are uploaded onto the website daily, and over 27,000 beauty
videos are posted every month.
Beauty Video Viewers
Beauty videos accumulate impressive view counts, totalling over 700
million views per month and 14.9 billion views overall since YouTube’s birth.
These views result from high subscriber counts for vloggers, but not brands:
only 2% of brand video views come from channel subscribers.
Brand v. Vlogger Channels
The data showed that an overwhelming majority of beauty content on
YouTube is published by vloggers: only 3% of beauty videos belong to brands.
Vloggers publish ten times more videos and seven times more frequently than
brands on average. Moreover, vlogger videos appear in YouTube search
results for beauty keywords 97.5% of the time, demonstrating their dominance
on the platform.
Viewer Preferences
Overall, the top vloggers receive on average 26 more comments than
brands channels, showing higher viewer interest. Tutorials are the most
popular video type, attracting 39% of all views. Vlogger tutorials are more
popular than brand tutorials, receiving 1,200% more views.
01/09/2015 29
V01968
4.4-‐Netnography Findings
4.4.1-‐Quantitative Findings
4.4.1.1-‐Number of Subscribers by Channel Category
Numbers of subscribers per channel category are compared in Table
9.
Beauty Brand Channels Beauty Vlogger Channels

Average 112,025 2,467,115
Minimum 18,294 903,781
Maximum 406,789 8,022,464
Table 9: Number of Subscribers by Channel Category
It is clear that vlogger channels boast a much higher number of
subscribers than brand channels. In fact, the average number of vlogger
subscribers is almost 23 times higher than the average number of brand
subscribers. Even the minimum number of subscribers for vloggers is still over
twice as high as the maximum number of subscribers for brands.
Subscribers are viewers who have willingly ‘subscribed’ to a channel to
receive notifications when a new video is uploaded, therefore demonstrating
enduring interest in the channel.
4.4.1.2-‐Number of Video Views by Channel Category
Beauty Brand Channels Beauty Vlogger Channels

Average 58,430,509 165,520,902
Minimum 5,533,218 53,948,544
Maximum 166,211,514 429,282,857
Table 10: Number of Video Views by Channel Category
01/09/2015 30
V01968
It can be seen in Table 10 that the difference in video views between
brand and vlogger channels is less drastic than the difference in subscribers.
In fact the average number of video views for vlogger channels is only 2.5
times higher than the average number of views for brand channels, despite
the tremendous difference in subscribers (Table 9). This seems to indicate that
YouTube users do view beauty brand videos, they just do not choose to
subscribe to the channel.
However, the high number of views proportional to the number of
subscribers for brand channels could largely be due to the fact that many
brand videos are ‘pushed’ via YouTube’s ‘In-streaming’ service. This means
that YouTube users are forced to watch these short videos before watching
other content. Because views are counted from the very first second, many
viewers may quickly exit or skip the video and still be counted. These view
counts are therefore artificially higher than reality (this holds true for all
following findings involving view figures).
4.4.1.3-‐Viewer Reaction by Channel Category
Beauty Brand Videos Beauty Vlogger Videos

Average Views 2,300,120 1,254,775
Average Likes 1,180 37,174
Average Dislikes 167 467
Average Comment Count 87 3,317
Table 11: Average Viewer Reaction by Channel Category
Beauty Brand Beauty Vlogger

Videos Videos
Total Views 92,004,805 50,190,995
Total Likes 47,200 1,486,951
Total Dislikes 6,685 18,660
01/09/2015 31
V01968
Total Comment Count 3,488 128,662
Table 12: Total Viewer Reaction by Channel Category
The artificial boost of brand video views can again be observed in
Tables 11 and 12. Indeed, although the brand videos had considerably higher
total and average numbers of views than the vlogger videos, viewers’
reaction to brand videos is much lower. ‘Reaction’ encompasses all voluntary
actions undertaken by the viewer to express him/herself (likes, dislikes,
comments).
There are almost 40 times as many likes on vlogger videos as there are
on brand videos on average. Moreover, the total number of comments for all
40 brand videos is barely higher than the average number of comments on
only one vlogger video. Vlogger videos clearly stir up more of a reaction, and
viewers take the time to express their opinion. Dislikes are the only form of
reaction that is somewhat comparable between the two channel categories.
This seems to suggest that the only form of active reaction to brand videos is
a negative one. This finding is corroborated by secondary data, which found
that the top vloggers received 26 times more comments than brands.
4.4.1.4-‐Viewer Reaction by Video Type
Vlogger PR Vlogger TUT Brand AD Brand BTS Brand TUT

Average Views 668,714 1,477,074 3,023,286 637,090 254,452
Average Likes 28,324 40,530 1,022 660 2,133
Average Dislikes 259 545 201 78 78
Average 2,993 3,301 52 54 255
Comment Count
Table 13: Average Viewer Reaction by Video Type
01/09/2015 32
V01968
The artificial boost of brand view counts is again observed in Table 13,
particularly for brand advertisements (AD), which are often the videos
promoted via ‘In-streaming’. Despite their impressive view count, brand
advertisements receive the lowest average number of comments and the
highest average number of dislikes within the brand category. This can
indicate dislike towards the brand, the ad, or more generally the ‘In-
streaming’ service.
Within the beauty vlogger channel category, viewers seem to prefer
tutorials (TUT) to product reviews (PR), as the former scored much higher for
views and all three reaction forms. This is also true for brand channels, with
brand tutorials (TUT) receiving the most likes and comments by far within the
category. Tutorials are step-by-step ‘how-to’ videos which aim to teach
viewers how to do a certain make-up look, hairstyle, etc. This finding agrees
with the secondary data’s conclusion that tutorials are YouTube’s most
popular beauty video type.
4.4.1.5-‐Viewer Reaction to Sponsored Vlogger Videos
Vlogger SPONSORED Vlogger NON-SPONSORED

Average Views 507,425 1,503,892
Average Likes 22,270 41,992
Average Dislikes 433 478
Average Comment Count 1,241 3,875
Table 14: Average Viewer Reaction to Sponsored Vlogger Videos
Sponsored videos are videos for which the vlogger has received
compensation, monetary or other. UK law now imposes full disclosure of
sponsored videos for YouTubers (indicated by the word ‘Ad’ in video titles).
01/09/2015 33
V01968
The data (Table 14) indicates that sponsored videos seem to get a less
positive reaction from viewers. This type of video only receives a third of the
views of non-sponsored videos on average, meaning that subscribers and
other viewers do not even click on a video with the word ‘Ad’. Sponsored
videos also receive less reaction, as indicated by the lower counts of likes and
comments. Viewers do not seem to actively dislike them however, as the
count of dislikes is similar across the two kinds of videos.
4.4.2-‐Qualitative Findings
4.4.2.1-‐Video Content and Music
The analysis of video content and music revealed significant
differences between brand and vlogger videos. Even within the brand
category, video content and music highly depended on video type. Brand
advertisements (AD) contained close-up shots of the celebrity and the
product. The music was attention-grabbing, with ‘rock’, ‘pop rock’ and
‘dance’ music coming up most often. Moreover, advertisements lasted 20 to
30 seconds on average. ‘Behind-the-Scenes’ videos (BTS) were of slightly
longer duration, and contained footage of the celebrity being interviewed.
Different music genres were used by different brands. Brand tutorials (TUT)
involved a makeup artist doing the celebrity’s makeup whilst talking, and
were often set to no or ‘ambiance’ music. This third brand video type most
resembles beauty vlogger videos, and received the most likes and
comments.
Both types of vlogger videos (PR and TUT) presented similar video
content and music. The beauty vlogger was most often facing the camera
and casually talking to it in a friendly tone. There was some light editing with
01/09/2015 34
V01968
short product cutaways and introductions. Vlogger videos revealed an
overwhelming majority of no or ‘ambiance’ music, meaning that the viewers’
focus could lie predominantly in the actual content.
4.4.2.2-‐Content of Viewer Comments
Mentions of the five source attributes in viewer comments were
summed for all brand and vlogger videos respectively in Table 15.
Brand Videos Vlogger Videos

ATT 36 22
CRED -11 30
LEG 4 22
POW 7 10
URG 0 7
Table 15: Sums of Mentions of Attributes in Viewer Comments
NB: A high result on an attribute was counted as +1 and a low result as -1
e.g. Brand Video Credibility = 3 (High) – 14 (Low) = -11
Vlogger videos scored higher on four out of five attributes. Of course
this can firstly be explained by the higher number of comments on vlogger
videos generally. Nevertheless all five attributes were closely examined and
results are detailed below. All example comments are unchanged.
Attractiveness
Although brand videos scored higher on this attribute overall (36 to 22
mentions), viewer comments predominantly referred to Physical
Attractiveness of the celebrity, with words such as “pretty”, “gorgeous” and
“perfect”. Vlogger videos however received comments referring to two of
01/09/2015 35
V01968
McGuire’s (1985) original components of attractiveness: likability and similarity
(Table 16).
High Vlogger Attractiveness

Likability “I love this, Zoe you are naturally so funny!!! This made me smile!”
“She is probably the nicest youtuber ever”
“I love all your videos so much and they make me really happy”
Similarity “YES! Thank you! Wow! Your eyes are identical to mine”
“Really helpful that you have the exact same hair as me !”
Table 16: Example Comments of High Vlogger Attractiveness
Physical Attractiveness also appeared in viewer comments on vlogger
videos, but not as often as for brand videos. This may indicate that celebrities
are more physically attractive than vloggers, or that vlogger viewers prefer
commenting on other video components. Familiarity was not referred to in
comments for brand or vlogger videos.
Credibility
Credibility turned out to be the most complex and interesting attribute
in viewer comments. Beauty brand videos actually scored negatively on this
attribute (-11), indicating that many comments openly expressed low
credibility. The main culprit was low Trustworthiness (Table 17).
Low Brand Trustworthiness

“PHOTOSHOP?????”
“Here's a bunch of super models putting on makeup, as the voiceover says "We'll
cover up nothing" *sigh*”
Table 17: Example Comments of Low Brand Trustworthiness
On the other hand, beauty vlogger videos score for Credibility was
their highest score overall (30). The main positive component was Expertise,
01/09/2015 36
V01968
with many viewers praising the vloggers’ technique in terms of beauty,
vlogging and video editing, asking for further advice and requesting
additional videos (Table 18).
High Vlogger Expertise

“Zoella please help me learn how to do a French braid
“What advice would you give to someone if they want to start blogging like you??”
“Nobody dicribes how to apply make-up better than Tanya! She is so well able to put
herself in the viewers shoes”
“Can we have tutorials on both your looks?!”
Table 18: Example Comments of High Vlogger Expertise
The few negative comments received by vloggers had to do with their
sponsorship activities (Table 19).
Negative Vlogger Comments

“The last 4 of 7 videos have been ads :/”
“Why is Louise doing ads so often these days? /-: I miss watching her just sit down
chatty videos”
Table 19: Examples of Negative Comments on Vlogger Videos
However, these do not indicate low trustworthiness, mainly irritation. In
fact, sponsorship activities actually increased viewers’ perception of the
vlogger’s Trustworthiness when disclosed (Table 20).
High Vlogger Trustworthiness

“Thanks for being so honest about it being paid. This makes me trust you more Essie!”
“Thanks for just saying straight up that its an ad”
“Not only do you tell us this contains sponsored content, you also tell us which
products are sponsored. You pretty much rock, Fleur de Force ;)”
Table 20: Example Comments of High Vlogger Trustworthiness
Legitimacy
01/09/2015 37
V01968
Vlogger videos scored much higher on this attribute than brand videos
(22 to 4). The few viewer comments indicating Legitimacy on brand videos
mainly referred to the celebrity’s fit with the brand and resulting legitimacy of
her endorsement (Table 21).
High Celebrity Legitimacy

“I think she is a perfect model for Chanel. I'm a huge fan of the brand and think she
embodies the esthetic of Chanel beautifully.”
Table 21: Example Comment of High Celebrity Legitimacy
For vlogger videos, legitimacy took on a much more emotional
dimension compared to the previous comment’s rational analysis of the
celebrity endorser’s fit. Viewers commented on how much the vlogger meant
to them, how helpful the video was, and how happy it made them feel (Table
22).
High Vlogger Legitimacy

“You are such an inspiration to me”
“This video has been a real amazing help xx thank you Tanya Burr”
“I was sad today but when I watched one of your videos it made me feel better!”
“I would be a little lost without your videos.”
Table 22: Example Comments of High Vlogger Legitimacy
Power
Power appeared in viewer comments in the form of influence over
viewers’ attitudes and behaviours. Vlogger and brand videos reached similar
scores on this attribute, with vloggers scoring only slightly higher. Brand videos
seem to predominantly influence purchase behavior (Table 23), while vlogger
videos seem to exert a wider influence. Viewers mentioned purchasing
beauty products and the vlogger’s own merchandise, as well as copying the
vloggers’ techniques (Table 24).
01/09/2015 38
V01968
Medium (Narrow) Brand Power

“I'm seriously thinking about trying out the purple one!”
“Oh,this brow pencils look very good i got to try them :)”
“I want to buy it, just because of Katy [Perry]”
Table 23: Example Comments of Medium Brand Power
With only seven mentions of influence, and one mention of an
effective celebrity endorsement (see third comment) however, the evidence
of power from brand videos is limited.
High Vlogger Power

“I bought your book today in Waterstones. I cant wait to relax and read it! :)”
“LOVE YOUR TUTORIALS! WILL SO DO THIS TOMORROW FOR A WEDDING”
“Tried Sunday Riley cause of Pixiwoo's recommendation...and WOW”
Table 24: Example Comments of High Vlogger Power
Urgency
This attribute was non-existent for brand videos but did manifest itself in
comments on vlogger videos (Table 25), indicated by the use of capital
letters, multiple exclamation marks and repetition of words such as ‘help’ and
‘please’:
High Vlogger Urgency

“ZOELLA!! I NEED HELP”
“I've got hooded eyes and my lashes only hold a curl for about half an hour, HELP
HELP HELP please?”
“Pls keep posting!! i need a mixed girl to help me with my makeup!!”
Table 25: Example Comments of High Vlogger Urgency
Summary Table
01/09/2015 39
V01968
Qualitative findings relating to source sub-attribute mentions in viewer
comments are summed up in Table 26.
Attribute Definition(s) Brand Videos Vlogger Videos

Familiarity - -
Similarity - HIGH
ATTRACTIVENESS
Likeability - HIGH
Physical Attractiveness HIGH MED
Expertise - HIGH
CREDIBILITY
Trustworthiness LOW HIGH
Desirable/ MED (Rational) HIGH (Emotional)
LEGITIMACY
Appropriate Action
POWER Influence MED (narrow) HIGH (and varied)
Criticality/ - HIGH
URGENCY
Time-sensitivity
Table 26: Summary Table of Sub-Attribute Mentions in Viewer Comments
4.5-‐Insights from Exploratory Research
Beauty on YouTube
Interest in the beauty category on YouTube is significant and rapidly
accelerating. Vloggers seem to dominate the scene, as brands own a
surprisingly small share of voice on the video platform. Viewers’ reactions to
vlogger videos is also drastically higher and more positive than brand videos.
Beauty Vloggers
Vlogger videos are generally comparable in content, with all vloggers
adopting a casual and friendly attitude. Vlogger channels boast a high
number of active subscribers. Not only do these subscribers watch the
vloggers’ videos, they also react by subscribing, liking and writing comments.
01/09/2015 40
V01968
Beauty Brands’ Celebrity Endorsers
Not all beauty brands utilise celebrity endorsements on YouTube, and
those that do obtain mixed results. Brand advertisements do receive a high
view count, but this is artificially boosted by paid ‘In-Streaming’. These
channels have low figures for likes, comments and subscribers. Dislikes are the
main form of reaction for brand videos, meaning that viewer reaction is either
non-existent or negative.
Video Content
Tutorials are the most popular beauty video type on YouTube, both for
vloggers and brands. This video type also received the most mentions of
Credibility (Expertise) in comments.
Vloggers’ Sponsorship Activities
Sponsored vlogger videos receive less reaction from their viewers
initially, as shown by the lower amounts of views and likes. However, the
comments on these videos are generally positive and demonstrate
Trustworthiness; the only negative comments display annoyance. Sponsorship
activities therefore do not seem to significantly affect vloggers’ Credibility.
Vloggers as Marketing Sources
Vloggers are ‘attractive’ in McGuire’s (1985) sense of the term: their fun
personality makes them likable and their authenticity similar. This seems to be
linked to their high emotional Legitimacy, as viewers grow to feel like vloggers
are their friends. By helping their viewers, vloggers become loved and
respected. Vloggers also demonstrate high Credibility, both in terms of
expertise and trustworthiness. In fact, credibility seems to be the main
attribute which sets them apart from brands. This credibility sometimes leads
01/09/2015 41
V01968
to Urgency from the viewers who require immediate and crucial help, as well
as Power with viewers acting on their recommendations.
Celebrities as Marketing Sources
Celebrities are physically attractive, but present no other components
of the Attractiveness attribute. This allows them to exert some Power on
viewers but the evidence is limited. Most importantly, celebrities have low
Credibility (Trustworthiness), perhaps because they are presented as ‘too
perfect’ in brand videos. Their only Legitimacy is rational and therefore not
deeply-rooted, and they seem to elicit no Urgency from viewers.
01/09/2015 42
V01968
Section V -‐ Descriptive Research

5.1-‐Research Hypotheses
The insights gained from exploratory research allowed for the
development of informed hypotheses to be tested in the descriptive research
phase. In order to formulate a research model, the Theory of Planned
Behavior (Ajzen, 1991) (TPB) was chosen as a basis. This theory links attitudes to
intentions, an important component of the aforementioned research
questions (cf. RQ3). Moreover, the TPB has been used in various studies
relating to source attributes (eg. Dholakia & Sternthal, 1977; Goldsmith et al.,
2000; Hsu et al., 2013), demonstrating its applicability to this particular
research.
The research model and its hypotheses are illustrated in Figure 3. The
valence of associations was hypothesised using exploratory research insights
when possible (cf. Table 26). The two dotted lines predict a potential
association between viewers’ attitude towards the source and viewers’
intention towards the product, which is not grounded in Azjen’s (1991) theory
of compatibility between attitudes and intentions (cf. H12b and H24b).
01/09/2015 43
V01968
Figure 3: Research Model
01/09/2015 44
V01968
The hypotheses illustrated in the research model above are detailed in
Table 27. Their links to the three aforementioned research questions are laid
out in Table 28.
Hypotheses Sub- Null Hypothesis H0 Alternate Hypothesis HA
hypotheses
H1 (ATT) H1a Beauty vloggers do not Beauty vloggers display Physical

display Physical Attractiveness
Attractiveness
H1b Beauty vloggers do not Beauty vloggers display Likability
display Likability
H1c Beauty vloggers do not Beauty vloggers display
display Familiarity Familiarity
H1d Beauty vloggers do not Beauty vloggers display Similarity
display Similarity
H2 (CRED) H2a Beauty vloggers do not Beauty vloggers display Expertise
display Expertise
H2b Beauty vloggers do not Beauty vloggers display
display Trustworthiness Trustworthiness
H3 (LEG) - Beauty vloggers do not Beauty vloggers display
display Legitimacy Legitimacy
H4 (POW) - Beauty vloggers do not Beauty vloggers display Power
display Power
H5 (URG) - Beauty vloggers do not Beauty vloggers display Urgency
display Urgency
H6 (ATT) H6a Beauty vloggers' Physical Beauty vloggers' Physical
Attractiveness does not elicit Attractiveness elicits a positive
a positive attitude from the attitude from the viewer
viewer
H6b Beauty vloggers' Likability Beauty vloggers' Likability elicits a
does not elicit a positive positive attitude from the viewer
attitude from the viewer
H6c Beauty vloggers' Familiarity Beauty vloggers' Familiarity elicits
does not elicit a positive a positive attitude from the
attitude from the viewer viewer
H6d Beauty vloggers' Similarity Beauty vloggers' Similarity elicits a
H7 (CRED) H7a Beauty vloggers' Expertise Beauty vloggers' Expertise elicits a
H7b Beauty vloggers' Beauty vloggers' Trustworthiness
Trustworthiness does not elicit elicits a positive attitude from the
a positive attitude from the viewer
viewer
H8 (LEG) - Beauty vloggers' Legitimacy Beauty vloggers' Legitimacy
does not elicit a positive elicits a positive attitude from the
attitude from the viewer viewer
H9 (POW) - Beauty vloggers' Power does Beauty vloggers' Power elicits a
not elicit a positive attitude positive attitude from the viewer
from the viewer
H10 (URG) - Beauty vloggers' Urgency Beauty vloggers' Urgency elicits a
H11 - Viewers' positive attitude Viewers' positive attitude towards
towards the beauty vlogger the beauty vlogger generates a
01/09/2015 45
V01968
does not generate a positive positive attitude towards the

attitude towards the product product
H12 H12a Viewers' positive attitude Viewers' positive attitude towards
towards the beauty vlogger the beauty vlogger generates a
does not generate a purchase intention for the
purchase intention for the product
product
H12b Viewers' positive attitude Viewers' positive attitude towards
towards the product does not the product generates a
generate a purchase purchase intention for the
intention for the product product
H13 (ATT) H13a Celebrities do not display Celebrities display Physical
Physical Attractiveness Attractiveness
H13b Celebrities do not display Celebrities display Likability
Likability
H13c Celebrities do not display Celebrities display Familiarity
Familiarity
H13d Celebrities do not display Celebrities display Physical
Similarity Similarity
H14 (CRED) H14a Celebrities do not display Celebrities display Expertise
Expertise
H14b Celebrities display Celebrities do not display
Trustworthiness Trustworthiness
H15 (LEG) - Celebrities do not display Celebrities display Legitimacy
Legitimacy
H16 (POW) - Celebrities do not display Celebrities display Power
Power
H17 (URG) - Celebrities do not display Celebrities display Urgency
Urgency
H18 (ATT) H18a Celebrities' Physical Celebrities' Physical
Attractiveness does not elicit Attractiveness elicits a positive
a positive attitude from the attitude from the viewer
viewer
H18b Celebrities' Likability does not Celebrities' Likability elicits a
elicit a positive attitude from positive attitude from the viewer
the viewer
H18c Celebrities' Familiarity does Celebrities' Familiarity elicits a
from the viewer
H18d Celebrities' Similarity does not Celebrities' Similarity elicits a
the viewer
H19 (CRED) H19a Celebrities' Expertise does not Celebrities' Expertise elicits a
the viewer
H19b Celebrities' Trustworthiness Celebrities' Trustworthiness does
elicits a positive attitude from not elicit a positive attitude from
the viewer the viewer
H20 (LEG) - Celebrities' Legitimacy does Celebrities' Legitimacy elicits a
from the viewer
H21 (POW) - Celebrities' Power does not Celebrities' Power elicits a
the viewer
H22 (URG) - Celebrities' Urgency does not Celebrities' Urgency elicits a
the viewer
H23 - Viewers' positive attitude Viewers' positive attitude towards
towards the celebrity does the celebrity generates a positive
not generate a positive attitude towards the product
attitude towards the product
01/09/2015 46
V01968
H24 H24a Viewers' positive attitude Viewers' positive attitude towards

towards the celebrity does the celebrity generates a
not generate a purchase purchase intention for the
H24b Viewers' positive attitude Viewers' positive attitude towards
towards the product does not the product generates a
generate a purchase purchase intention for the
Table 27: Research Hypotheses
Research Topic Hypotheses

Question
RQ1a Beauty vloggers' attributes H1, H2, H3, H4, H5
RQ1b Celebrity endorsers' attributes H13, H14, H15, H16, H17
RQ2 Differences between vlogger and celebrity H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H13,
attributes H14, H15, H16, H17
RQ3a Beauty vloggers' impact on viewers H6, H7, H8, H9, H10, H11,
H12
RQ3b Celebrity endorsers' impact on viewers H18, H19, H20, H21, H22,
H23, H24
Table 28: Links between Research Questions and Hypotheses
5.2-‐Research Method
5.2.1-‐Experimental Questionnaire
An experimental questionnaire is a research method which combines
aspects of experiments and surveys. Respondents typically participate in an
experiment and are then asked to answer questions about their experience.
This research method was employed through the process detailed in Table 29.
Step Component Detail

Step 1 - Respondents are invited to open a link
Step 2 CONSENT Respondents are presented with an information sheet
detailing the conditions of their participation in the research
Step 3 PRE-SURVEY Respondents answer a few short preliminary questions about
their current experience and knowledge of YouTube beauty
01/09/2015 47
V01968
channels.
Step 4 EXPERIMENT Respondents view two videos. Both are about one beauty
product: ‘Lip Butter’ lipsticks by Revlon. The first video is an
official advertisement by the brand featuring a celebrity
endorser; the second video is a product review by a beauty
vlogger.
Step 5 SURVEY Respondents answer:
1. Questions about each of the videos in turn;
2. Questions about both videos simultaneously;
3. Classification questions.
Table 29: Experimental Questionnaire Process
5.2.2.1-‐Academic Examples
Throughout 70+ years of research in the field of message sources,
variants of the experimental questionnaire method have been employed in
prestigious journals, including Journal of Consumer Research and Public
Opinion Quarterly (examples spanning five decades in Table 30). Typically,
treatment groups would be given information booklets from two different
sources in order to test the effect of source attributes, followed by a
questionnaire.
Author(s) Year Title Journal

Hovland and 1951 The Influence of Source Credibility on Public Opinion
Weiss Communication Effectiveness Quarterly
Koeske and 1968 The effect of Congruous and Journal of
Crano Incongruous Source-statement Experimental Social
Combinations upon the Judged Psychology
Credibility of a Communication
Dholakia and 1977 Highly Credible Sources: Persuasive Journal of
Sternthal Facilitators or Persuasive Liabilities Consumer
Research
McGinnies 1980 Better Liked than Right: Personality and
01/09/2015 48
V01968
and Ward Trustworthiness and Expertise as Social Psychology

Factors in Credibility Bulletin
Kahle and 1985 Physical Attractiveness of the Journal of
Homer Celebrity Endorser: A Social Consumer
Adaptation Perspective Research
Gotlieb and 1991 Comparative Advertising Journal of
Sarel Effectiveness: The Role of Advertising
Involvement and Source Credibility
Table 30: Examples of Articles Using the Experimental Questionnaire Method
Research into message sources then moved to the web, and
experimental questionnaires were conducted using online sources and online
surveys (examples in Table 31). These web-based experimental questionnaires
respected the same format as their predecessors, namely exposure to the
source followed by a survey. This tried and true methodology was therefore
chosen for this dissertation.
Author(s) Year Title Journal

Bickhart and 2001 Internet Forums as Influential Sources Journal of
Schindler of Consumer Information Interactive
Marketing
Armstrong and 2009 Blogs of Information: How Gender Journal of
McAdams Cues and Individual Motivations Computer-
Influence Perceptions of Credibility Mediated
Communications
Table 31: Examples of Articles Using the Experimental Questionnaire Method Online
5.2.2.2-‐Strengths and Weaknesses
Experimental questionnaires combine the strengths of experiments and
surveys to form a unique research method. Like traditional experiments, it
targets respondents in their own natural environment, namely watching a
YouTube video on their personal computers in this case. It allows for a precise
01/09/2015 49
V01968
control of independent variables, thus increasing the validity of the research.
A web-based experiment also overcomes the usual problem of high costs in
terms of money and time (Aaker et al., 2012).
As for the questionnaire, it enables a detailed quantification of
attitudes, as well as the collection of large amounts of data thanks to wide
distribution. There is also less room for biases, as results come straight from
respondents and are methodically analysed, thus increasing reliability. Finally,
respondents are more willing to participate as they are guaranteed
anonymity as well as the convenience of working at their own pace.
Questionnaires do present certain disadvantages, namely respondents being
left to interpret questions on their own and not being able to provide much
detail to their answer (ibid.). However, a careful questionnaire design will limit
the impact of these weaknesses by reducing ambiguity and ensuring all
required questions are asked.
5.2.3-‐Ethical Implications
No ethical implications were found with the experimental
questionnaire, as the information sheet viewed by respondents upon clicking
the questionnaire link (c.f. Appendix 4) fully detailed the conditions of their
participation in the research.
5.3-‐Research Instrument
5.3.1-‐Questionnaire Design
The full experimental questionnaire can be viewed in Appendix 4. Its
design is detailed below.
01/09/2015 50
V01968
5.3.1.1-‐Content
After four preliminary questions about their prior knowledge of beauty
vlogger and brand channels, respondents entered the experiment. As
explained in Table 29, the experiment consisted of viewing two videos relating
to the same beauty product, presented by two sources. Videos were kept to
the same length in order to limit any possible biases.
The subsequent questionnaire was built to fully address all research
questions and hypotheses, ensuring its validity. Links between survey questions
and hypotheses are detailed in Table 32. Individual questions were built on
insights gained from exploratory research, particularly in terms of adjectives
and verbs, to fully resonate with the sample and delve quicker into the topic.
The questionnaire was composed of two main question blocks about vloggers
and brands. Although most questions were identical, some were modified in
order to add granularity when issues were revealed as more complex by
exploratory research (e.g. Q13 vs. Q36). The questionnaire ended with
classification questions relating to age and beauty product habits. Placing
these questions of lesser importance last increased chances of more
important questions being answered.
Survey Hypothesis Survey Q Hypothesis Survey Q Hypothesis

Question
1-4 - 21 H21 38 H2b
5 H13a 22 H17 39 H7b
6 H18a 23 H22 40 H3
7 H13b 24 H23 41 H8
8 H18b 25 H23; H24a 42 H4
9 H13c 26 H24a; H24b 43 H9
10 H18c 27 H1a 44 H5
11 H13d 28 H6a 45 H10
01/09/2015 51
V01968
12 H18d 29 H1b 46 H11

13 H14a 30 H6b 47 H11; H12a
14 H14a 31 H1c 48 H12a; H12b
15 H19a 32 H6c 49 H1-5; H13-17
16 H14b 33 H1d 50 H18-22
17 H19b 34 H6d 51 H6-10
18 H15 35 H2a 52 - 54 -
19 H20 36 H2a
20 H16 37 H7a
Table 32: Links between Survey Questions and Hypotheses
5.3.1.2-‐Format
The questionnaire’s length was kept to a minimum in order to maximise
the volume and quality of responses by limiting fatigue. Breaking up the
questionnaire into several smaller sections as well as varying the question
formats (multiple choice, scales, etc.) ensured flow and minimised the
perception of length.
Our research model required the use of skip logic in the questionnaire.
All questions about a source displaying an attribute were followed by a
question on the impact of that attribute on the attitude towards the source, if
the first question was answered with an ‘Agree’ or ‘Strongly Agree’. This
ensured that the questionnaire fully tested the associations in the proposed
research model.
5.3.1.3-‐Scaling
A five-point Likert scale was used for many of the questions relating to
source attributes. Five points were chosen over three in order to ensure
enough granularity and detail, and over seven to limit the difficulty of the
questionnaire. Judgments about source attributes were deemed particularly
01/09/2015 52
V01968
intangible, and quantifying them with a seven-point Likert scale may have
been overwhelming for respondents.
5.3.1.4-‐Pre-‐testing
The experimental questionnaire was pre-tested with three respondents.
Some changes were made following the pre-tests, particularly in terms of
question ambiguity. Questionnaire length and respondent fatigue were not
brought up as issues.
5.3.1.5-‐Possible Biases
The use of Emma Stone as the celebrity source may have created
some bias, as she is a particularly liked individual (this was revealed in the pre-
tests and survey follow-up comments). However, this was possibly
counteracted by the chosen vlogger being generally appreciated as well.
Moreover, two survey questions (Q15 and Q41) may be regarded as
leading, however they are stating information that the video viewer would
already have on the marketing sources or could easily be informed of by the
source or context.
5.3.2-‐Mode of Administration
The experimental questionnaire was distributed online through the
Qualtrics website (http://www.qualtrics.com/). Respondents were sent a link
to access the questionnaire directly. The two videos were accessed via their
YouTube URLs.
5.3.3-‐Sampling
The population to be studied is detailed in Table 33 (justification for the
characteristics was obtained via secondary data).
01/09/2015 53
V01968
Population Characteristic Why?

Women Main consumers of beauty products
Aged 16-35 Main viewers of YouTube beauty videos
English-speaking To be able to understand the product-related
videos in English
Table 33: Intended Research Population
This clearly yields a substantial population to be studied, and a sample
therefore had to be drawn. Due to the researcher’s limited time resources,
the convenience sampling method was chosen. This non-probability sampling
method presents the advantages of ease and speed, but may create certain
biases (Aaker et al., 2012). However, it has been successfully used in similar
studies on source attributes with researchers using students as their only
respondents (eg. Grewal et al., 1994; Armstrong and McAdams, 2009).
Moreover, by encouraging snowballing, the sample was extended beyond
the researcher’s convenience pool to include a higher number and variation
of responses. The initial target of 100 respondents was reached and
exceeded.
5.4-‐Data Preparation
5.4.1-‐Exporting the Data
All data recorded through the Qualtrics website were exported into
the SPSS software for subsequent stages of the descriptive research process.
5.4.2-‐Data Completeness
Malhotra and Birks (2007) put forth two issues relating to data
completeness: (i) parts of the questionnaire may be incomplete for certain
01/09/2015 54
V01968
respondents and/or (ii) the returned survey may be physically incomplete for
paper-based questionnaires. Although the latter issue did not apply in this
case, the former did present itself in some cases for the experimental
questionnaire, but was dealt with in two steps:
1. Questionnaires missing a substantial amount of answers were
discarded, leaving 104 usable questionnaires out of the initial 156 (67%). Of
these 104 questionnaires, 6 were still ‘unfinished’ but had enough usable data
to be kept.
2. For scaled questions, missing values were replaced with the average
response to that question (see example below). This procedure avoids
creating any bias in the data set (Aaker et al., 2012).
Example: The two missing values for Variable “H17_Brand_URG” were

replaced with the mean value 2 (rounded down from 2.21) found in Table 34.
Table 34: “H17_Brand_URG” Descriptive Statistics – SPSS Output
Nevertheless, the regular use of skip logic throughout the
questionnaire, meant to reflect the flow of the research model, led to a large
amount of missing values. For many questions, if respondents answered
anything from ‘Strongly Disagree’ to ‘Neither Agree or Disagree’, a
subsequent question was not displayed and therefore could not be
answered. Similarly, multiple-choice questions coded as multiple variables
inevitably left some answers blank. This was a natural aspect of the
experimental questionnaire and did not impede statistical analysis.
01/09/2015 55
V01968
5.4.3-‐Data Coding
Before responses could be analysed in SPSS, it was essential to code
the data in a suitable format to ensure compatibility with the software. All 101
variables resulting from the questionnaire were named and descriptive labels
added. Variable names included the number of the hypothesis tested by that
question in order to simplify statistical analysis later. Responses to categorical
questions were coded and all response values were labelled (see Appendix 5
for the SPPS Variable View).
5.5-‐Descriptive Statistics
5.5.1-‐Demographics and Beauty Habits
All questionnaire respondents were women aged 16-35, as defined by
our sampling criteria. In Figure 4 we can see that over half of the respondents
are aged 21-25, however the other three categories are also well
represented.
Figure 4: Respondent Age Distribution (SPSS Output)
01/09/2015 56
V01968
As for beauty habits, Figure 5 shows us that almost 75% of respondents
spent less than 40 GBP a month on beauty products, and ‘big spenders’ (60
GBP+) only represented a small proportion of the sample. Moreover, an
overwhelming majority of respondents (78%) indicated that their beauty
purchases mainly occurred in store as opposed to online.
Figure 5: Respondent Average Monthly Spend on Beauty Products (SPSS Output)
5.5.2-‐Experience of Beauty Content on YouTube
The introductory questions of the questionnaire provided insight into
respondents’ current experience of beauty content on YouTube. Most
respondents were aware of beauty brand and vlogger channels (69.2% and
75% respectively), however beauty vlogger channels showed more
subscription behaviour than brand channels (31.7% and 6.7% respectively).
01/09/2015 57
V01968
5.5.3-‐Perception of Message Sources
After viewing both videos, respondents were asked to indicate which
source, brand endorser or vlogger, demonstrated the highest level of each
sub-attribute (results are detailed in Table 35). From the overwhelming
majorities highlighted in green, we can already see that celebrities and
vloggers present distinct characteristics in viewers’ eyes, with endorsers being
more physically attractive, familiar and urgent, and vloggers more similar,
expert, trustworthy and legitimate. These results seem to corroborate findings
from the earlier exploratory research but will be investigated in much more
detail in the next sections.
Sub-Attribute Answer: Brand Answer: Vlogger

Endorser
Physical Attractiveness 84.7% 15.3%
Likability 51% 49%
Familiarity 60.2% 39.8%
Similarity 13.3% 86.7%
Expertise 15.3% 84.7%
Trustworthiness 11.2% 88.8%
Legitimacy 36.7% 63.3%
Power 55.1% 44.9%
Urgency 69.4% 30.6%
Table 35: Answer Distribution to Survey Q49
5.6-‐Hypotheses Testing
5.6.1-‐Attributes Displayed
01/09/2015 58
V01968
This first section presents all hypothesis testing relating to sub-attributes
displayed by the sources: H1-H5 (vloggers) and H13-H17 (endorsers), or in
other words the first half of the research model (Fig.6).
Figure 6: Hypothesis Testing Stage 1 - Before
5.6.1.1-‐Vloggers
Our first hypothesis H1a states:
H1a (null)=Beauty vloggers do not display Physical Attractiveness
H1a (alternate)=Beauty vloggers display Physical Attractiveness
In order to test this hypothesis, we compare the variable mean
(variable:“H1a_Vlog_ATT”) to 3 (the mean of the five-point Likert scale used).
We now have:
H1a (null)=Mean rating of beauty vloggers’ Physical Attractiveness <3
01/09/2015 59
V01968
H1a (alternate)=Mean rating of beauty vloggers’ Physical Attractiveness ≥3
We run a single mean t-test in SPSS using a 90% confidence level and
obtain the output in Table 36.
Table 36: H1a single mean t-test – SPSS Output
The p-value is 0.000, below the ∝ value at 0.10. The null hypothesis is
therefore rejected: the two values are statistically different. Looking closer, we
see that not only are they different, but the mean rating of vloggers’ physical
attractiveness is greater than 3 (3.60). This means that beauty vloggers do
display this sub-attribute.
The same process was followed for all vlogger sub-attributes, with
results displayed in Table 37 (SPSS outputs in Appendix 6).
Hyp Null Hypothesis p-value Are the means Variable Do vloggers

statistically Mean display the
different? subattribute?
H1b Beauty vloggers do not 0.000 Yes 3.83 YES
display Likability
H1c Beauty vloggers do not 0.000 Yes 2.04 NO
display Familiarity
H1d Beauty vloggers do not 0.000 Yes 1.25 YES
display Similarity
H2a Beauty vloggers do not 0.000 Yes 4.12 YES
display Expertise
H2b Beauty vloggers do not 0.000 Yes 1.92 YES
display Trustworthiness
H3 Beauty vloggers do not 0.000 Yes 1.88 YES
display Legitimacy
H4 Beauty vloggers do not 0.001 Yes 3.35 YES
display Power
01/09/2015 60
V01968
H5 Beauty vloggers do not 0.404 No

display Urgency
Table 37: H1b-H5 single mean t-tests – Results
The interpretation of the statistical results displayed in the last column
depended on the wording of the question used.
5.6.1.2-‐Celebrities
The same process was followed for endorser sub-attributes, with results
displayed in Table 38 (SPSS outputs in Appendix 7).
Hyp Null Hypothesis p-value Are the means Variable Do

statistically Mean endorsers
different? display the
subattribute?
H13a Celebrities do not display 0.000 Yes 4.14 YES
Physical Attractiveness
H13b Celebrities do not display 0.000 Yes 3.91 YES
Likability
H13c Celebrities do not display 0.000 Yes 4.37 YES
Familiarity
H13d Celebrities do not display 0.000 Yes 2.45 NO
Similarity
H14a Celebrities do not display 0.001 Yes 1.35 NO
Expertise
H14b Celebrities do not display 0.697 No
Trustworthiness
H15 Celebrities do not display 0.000 Yes 1.72 YES
Legitimacy
H16 Celebrities do not display 0.000 Yes 2.63 NO
Power
H17 Celebrities do not display 0.000 No 2.20 NO
Urgency
Table 38: H13a-H17 single mean t-tests – Results
01/09/2015 61
V01968
In the case of H14b, it should be noted that only 8.7% respondents said
they believed Emma was making an honest recommendation in the
advertisement. Although no conclusive result was obtained, survey answers
did show low trustworthiness.
The result of this first stage of hypothesis testing is displayed in Figure 7,
with green and red arrows demonstrating statistically significant results and
grey arrows representing unproven hypotheses.
Figure 7: Hypothesis Testing Stage 1 - Results
01/09/2015 62
V01968
5.6.2-‐Effects of Attributes
This section presents all hypothesis testing relating to the effect of sub-
attributes on attitude towards the source: H6-H10 (vloggers) and H18-H22
(endorsers). All sub-attributes which were proven absent, or for which no
conclusion was reached, are absent from this analysis of the second half of
the proposed research model (Fig.8).
Figure 8: Hypothesis Testing Stage 2 - Before
5.6.2.1-‐Vloggers
Our hypothesis H6a states:
H6a (null)=Beauty vloggers' Physical Attractiveness does not elicit a positive attitude
from the viewer
H6a (alternate)=Beauty vloggers' Physical Attractiveness elicits a positive attitude
from the viewer
01/09/2015 63
V01968
In order to test this hypothesis, we compare the variable mean
(variable:“H6a_Vlog_ATT_pos”) to 3 (the mean of the five-point Likert scale
used in the question). We now have:
H6a (null)=Mean liking of beauty vloggers because of Physical Attractiveness <3
H6a (alternate)=Mean liking of beauty vloggers because of Physical Attractiveness ≥3
We run a single mean t-test using a 90% confidence level and obtain
the output in Table 39.
Table 39: H6a single mean t-tests – SPSS Output
The p-value is 0.006, below the ∝ value at 0.10. The null hypothesis is
rejected: the two values are statistically different. As the mean liking of
vloggers because of their physical attractiveness is greater than 3 (3.29), this
sub-attribute does cause a positive effect on viewers’ attitudes towards
vloggers.
The same process was followed for all vlogger sub-attributes, with
results displayed in Table 40 (SPSS outputs in Appendix 8).
Hyp Null Hypothesis p-value Are the Variable Attribute has

means stat. Mean a positive
different? effect?
H6b Beauty vloggers' Likability 0.000 Yes 3.94 YES
does not elicit a positive
H6d Beauty vloggers' Similarity 0.069 Yes 3.20 YES
H7a Beauty vloggers' 0.000 Yes 3.42 YES
01/09/2015 64
V01968
Expertise does not elicit a

positive attitude from the
viewer
H7b Beauty vloggers' 0.000 Yes 3.48 YES
Trustworthiness does not
elicit a positive attitude
from the viewer
H8 Beauty vloggers' 0.000 Yes 3.59 YES
Legitimacy does not elicit
a positive attitude from
the viewer
H9 Beauty vloggers' Power 0.117 No
Table 40: H6b-H9 single mean t-tests – Results
The same process was followed for endorser sub-attributes, with results
displayed in Table 41 (SPSS outputs in Appendix 9).
Hyp Null Hypothesis p-value Are the Variable Attribute has

means stat. Mean a positive
different? effect?
H18a Celebrities' Physical 0.000 Yes 3.65 YES
Attractiveness does not
elicit a positive attitude
from the viewer
H18b Celebrities' Likability does 0.000 Yes 3.96 YES
not elicit a positive
H18c Celebrities' Familiarity 0.000 Yes 3.45 YES
H20 Celebrities' Legitimacy 0.658 No
Table 41: H18a-H20 single mean t-tests – Results
01/09/2015 65
V01968
The result of this second stage of hypothesis testing is displayed in
Figure 9 along with the first stage, with green and red arrows demonstrating
statistically significant results and grey arrows representing unproven
hypotheses.
5.6.3-‐Effect of Positive Attitude towards Sources
This section presents all hypothesis testing relating to the effect of
positive attitudes towards sources on attitudes towards product purchase
(H11 and H23).
5.6.3.1-‐Vloggers
Our hypothesis H11 states:
H11 (null)= Viewers' positive attitude towards the beauty vlogger does not generate a
positive attitude towards the product
01/09/2015 66
V01968
H11 (alternate)= Viewers' positive attitude towards the beauty vlogger generates a
positive attitude towards the product
In order to test this hypothesis, we wish to test the statistical
independence of variables “H11_Vlog_Attitude” (liking the vlogger) and
“H11_Vlog_Attitude_3” (wanting to purchase the product). As there two
variables are nominal, we run a chi-square test in SPSS and obtain the output
in Table 42.
Table 42: H11 Chi-square test – SPSS Output
We see that 0.0% cells have an expected count of less than 5, so the
test’s assumption have not been violated. The asymptotic significance level is
0.005, below ∝, so we can reject the null hypothesis: the two variables are not
statistically independent. There is an association between video viewers liking
the vlogger and wanting to purchase the product, in other words between
attitude towards the vlogger and attitude towards the product.
01/09/2015 67
V01968
Furthermore, Phi and Cramer’s V symmetric measures were calculated
(Table 43):
Table 43: H11 Phi and Cramer’s V values – SPSS Output
As the Phi value is 0.275, the association between the two variables
can be qualified as moderate.
The same procedure was followed for H23 (SPSS output in
Appendix 10). However, the chi-square test’s assumption was violated as 25%
of cells had an expected count of less than 5. We therefore looked at Fisher’s
Exact Test instead, and found a significance level of 0.025, below ∝, so we
can reject the null hypothesis: the two variables are not statistically
independent. Again, there is an association between attitude towards the
celebrity and attitude towards the product.
5.6.4-‐Theory of Planned Behaviour
As detailed in Section 5.1, our research model was based on Ajzen’s
(1991) TPB, which argues a strong correlation between attitude towards an
action and the intention to perform it. Two important hypotheses, H12b
(vloggers) and H24b (celebrities), test the theory in this context.
5.6.4.1-‐Vloggers
Our hypothesis H12a states:
01/09/2015 68
V01968
H12a (null)= Viewers' positive attitude towards the product does not generate
a purchase intention for the product
H12a (alternate)= Viewers' positive attitude towards the product generates a
purchase intention for the product
In order to test this hypothesis, we wish to test the statistical
independence of variables “H11_Vlog_Attitude_3” (wanting to purchase the
product) and “H11_Vlog_Attitude_4” (purchasing the product). We run a chi-
square test in SPSS and obtain the output in Table 44.
Table 44: H12a Chi-square test – SPSS Output

As the test’s assumption is violated, we look at the significance level of
Fisher’s Exact Test: 0.000. This is below ∝, so we can reject the null hypothesis:
the two variables are not statistically independent. There is an association
between attitude towards purchase and product purchase intention, in line
with Ajzen’s TPB.
The same procedure was followed for H24b (SPSS output in Appendix
11). The significance level of Fisher’s Exact Test was 1.000, above ∝, so we
could not reject the null hypothesis. The two variables are statistically
01/09/2015 69
V01968
independent, there is no association between attitude towards purchase and
product purchase intention in the context of celebrity endorsement.
5.6.5-‐Direct Effect of Attitude towards Sources
We also wanted to see if a positive attitude towards message sources
could directly affect purchase intention, through hypotheses H12a and H24a.
In the case of celebrity endorsements, the source was only found to trigger a
purchase intention 16.3% of the time, whereas 75% respondents said their own
desire for product was a stronger cause. The vlogger’s recommendation had
a stronger effect, with 26.9% respondents saying it impacted purchase
intention. Overall, these weak frequencies and the previous hypothesis testing
tell us that attitude towards the purchase (H12b/H24b) has a stronger effect
on purchase intention than attitude towards the source (H12a/H24a).
Results of this last stage of hypothesis testing are displayed in Figure 10.
01/09/2015 70
V01968
5.7-‐Descriptive Research Findings
The research model can be completed with all findings from the
descriptive research phase of the research (Figure 11). These will be further
detailed and developed in the next section.
Figure 11: Research Model Results
01/09/2015 71
V01968
Section VI -‐ Discussion

6.1-‐Introduction
Relating back to the Literature Review, the Discussion section provides
a critical evaluation of the research findings. The research statement was:
How do beauty vloggers and celebrity endorsers compare

as marketing sources for beauty brands?
The statement was further broken down into three research questions,
which structure this discussion of the findings.
6.2-‐Research Questions 1&2 – Source Attributes
6.2.1-‐Beauty Vloggers
RQ1a: What source attributes do beauty vloggers display?

Which attributes are most prevalent?
Exploratory research discovered that beauty vloggers displayed a
medium to high level of all attributes within the conceptual framework except
Familiarity. This was confirmed by descriptive research which found that
vloggers displayed Physical Attractiveness, Likability, Similarity, Expertise,
Trustworthiness, Legitimacy and Power. Their Familiarity was proven to be
negative or absent, and no conclusion was reached for Urgency.
These findings closely resemble those of previous academic studies on
bloggers which demonstrated their high credibility (Bickhart and Schindler,
2001; Armstrong and McAdams, 2009; Johnson and Kaye, 2009), their unique
similarity to readers (Keng and Ting, 2009) and their impressive power,
01/09/2015 72
V01968
urgency and legitimacy as ‘social networkers’ and ‘concerned influencers’
(Sedereviciute and Valentini, 2011; Wilson, 2012). Novel attributes uncovered
by this research on beauty vloggers therefore included Physical
Attractiveness and Likeability.
As previously explained, credibility is composed of Expertise and
Trustworthiness, although the two attributes typically operate independently
(Wiener and Mowen, 1986) and have been studied to various degrees by
different authors. Interestingly, exploratory research discovered that beauty
vloggers’ sponsored activities did not harm their trustworthiness, as previously
suggested by authors including Greer (2003) and Kim (2012) who proved that
online credibility was not tarnished by the presence of advertisements.
6.2.2-‐Celebrities
RQ1b: What source attributes do celebrity endorsers display?

Which attributes are most prevalent?
Both exploratory and descriptive research found that beauty brands’
celebrity endorsers displayed impressive levels of Physical Attractiveness, a
recurring celebrity attribute in the source literature (Kahle and Homer, 1985;
Ohanian, 1991; Amos et al., 2008). Endorsers also displayed Likability, as
suggested by previous academic findings (Petty et al., 1983). New attributes
uncovered by our research included Familiarity and Legitimacy, although the
latter was mainly rational. Many attributes were proven to be low or absent
for celebrity endorsers, namely Similarity, Expertise, Power and Urgency.
The low levels of Expertise and Trustworthiness uncovered by
descriptive and exploratory research respectively go against the findings of
previous authors including Ohanian (1991), Amos et al. (2008) and Goldsmith
01/09/2015 73
V01968
et al. (2000) whose studies had demonstrated high expertise and
trustworthiness amongst celebrity endorsers.
6.2.3-‐Notable Differences
RQ2: What are the notable differences between beauty vloggers and
celebrity endorsers in terms of source attributes?
Although both vloggers and celebrities scored highly on overall
Attractiveness, the two sources actually displayed very different proportions
of sub-attributes. Celebrities can count on their Familiarity to ensure their
attractiveness as sources, and vloggers rely mainly on their Similarity to
viewers. While previous literature had recognised bloggers’ distinctive
similarity (Keng and Ting, 2009), this attribute had not yet been contrasted
with celebrities. Moreover, both sources did display Physical Attractiveness
and Likability to varying degrees (this was a novel finding of this research for
vloggers). This is particularly interesting as likability as mediated by physical
attractiveness was previously found to increase message persuasiveness by
the most authors, and these are two of the very few attributes displayed by
both sources.
Second, our research uncovered alarmingly low levels of Credibility for
celebrities compared to the remarkably high levels for vloggers. This finding
disconfirms previous academic findings on celebrities, and most importantly
singles out the main differentiating attribute between the two sources.
Celebrity endorsers were often perceived as ‘too perfect’ and therefore not
credible, while vloggers were described as ‘normal girls’.
Third, Legitimacy was another attribute displayed by both sources,
although celebrities’ legitimacy was mainly rational while vloggers’ presented
a richer, more emotional dimension for viewers. Vloggers were the only
01/09/2015 74
V01968
source to display any form of Power, and lastly the Urgency attribute was
either absent or inconclusive for both sources.
6.3-‐Research Question 3 – Attitude and Intention
6.3.1-‐Beauty Vloggers
RQ3a: What impact do beauty vloggers’ attributes have on the
viewers’ attitude and purchase intention?
The impressive numbers of subscribers, likes and positive comments
found for vlogger videos during the exploratory research phase were
explained by the descriptive findings. Indeed, it was demonstrated that many
source attributes displayed by beauty vloggers trigger a positive attitude from
the viewer towards the vlogger. These attributes were: Physical Attractiveness,
Likability, Similarity, Expertise, Trustworthiness and Legitimacy. Power, although
displayed by vloggers, was not found to have an effect.
Most importantly, this positive attitude towards the vlogger was then
shown to translate into a positive attitude towards a product purchase and
finally an actual purchase intention, as theorised by Ajzen (1991). This is largely
supported by previous academic findings which stress the influence of source
credibility, an attribute outstandingly displayed by vloggers, on recipients’
attitudes and opinions (Bickhart and Schindler, 2001; Armstrong and
McAdams, 2009; Johnson and Kaye, 2009). In regards to bloggers and
vloggers specifically, earlier authors had demonstrated their strong influence
as opinion leaders (Katz and Lazarsfeld, 1970) on their following’s opinions
and consumption patterns (Mutum and Wang, 2010; Sedereviciute and
Valentini, 2011; Chau and Xu, 2012; Wilson, 2012). In fact, blogs have been
01/09/2015 75
V01968
repeatedly found to influence all five stages of the consumer decision
process (Hsu et al., 2013), from the earlier decision stages (Colliander and
Dahlén, 2011; Aggarwal and Singh, 2013) to the final purchase stages (Dhar
and Chang, 2009). Our conclusion that beauty vloggers positively influence
attitudes towards product purchases and purchase intentions are in line with
these earlier academic findings.
6.3.2-‐Celebrities
RQ3b: What impact do celebrity endorsers’ attributes have on the
viewers’ attitude and purchase intention?
Findings from exploratory research relating to RQ3b were mainly
negative, as brand videos featuring celebrity endorsers elicited a low or even
negative reaction from viewers (low subscriber count, dislikes and negative
comments). This is in line with Tripp et al.’s (1994) conclusions that increased
exposure to celebrities may create a negative attitude towards
advertisements.
Descriptive research allowed us to delve deeper into the subject and it
was found that only three source attributes displayed by celebrities trigger a
positive attitude from viewers: Physical Attractiveness, Likability and
Familiarity. Interestingly, these are only components of the overall
Attractiveness attribute. Kahle and Homer (1985) and Petty et al. (1983) had
previously demonstrated the positive influence of celebrities’ physical
attractiveness and likability respectively on attitudes. Similarly to vloggers, this
positive attitude translated into a positive attitude towards a product
purchase. However its progress into an actual purchase intention was not
proven in the context of celebrity endorsers.
01/09/2015 76
V01968
Section VII – Conclusion

7.1-‐Conclusive Remarks
The key conclusions of this research are summarised in Table 45, a
finalised version of Table 1 “Conceptual Framework” complete with all
findings.
Attributes Beauty Vloggers Celebrity Endorsers

Positive Viewer Positive Viewer Positive Viewer Positive Viewer
Source Purchase Purchase
Sub-Attribute Displayed Attitude towards Attitude towards Displayed Attitude Attitude towards
Attribute Intention Intention
Source Purchase towards Source Purchase
Likability Yes Yes Yes Yes
Familiarity No N/A Yes Yes
Attractiveness
Similarity Yes Yes No N/A
Physical Attractiveness Yes Yes Yes Yes
Expertise Yes Yes Yes Yes No N/A Yes No
Credibility
Trustworthiness Yes Yes ? N/A
Legitimacy - Yes Yes Yes ?
Power - Yes ? No N/A
Urgency - ? N/A No N/A
Table 45: Complete Conceptual Framework
Through extensive exploratory and descriptive research, it has been
demonstrated that both beauty vloggers and celebrity endorsers display the
two sub-attributes put forth by previous literature as most effective: physical
attractiveness and likability. However, there are still key differences between
the two sources uncovered by this research which must be highlighted. Firstly,
of all five attributes, only celebrity endorsers’ attractiveness has been found to
positively affect viewer attitudes. Even then, no purchase intention is
triggered by this positive attitude, thus severely challenging endorsers’
effectiveness as message sources.
Second, in the case of vloggers, their expertise and trustworthiness,
that is to say overall credibility, seem to be their most influential and distinctive
source sub-attributes. Their emotional legitimacy and similarity-based
attractiveness also significantly impact viewer reactions. A high number of
01/09/2015 77
V01968
vlogger attributes therefore have the power to create a positive viewer
attitude and most importantly trigger a purchase intention towards products.
7.2-‐Managerial Recommendations
The source of a message can be as important if not more than the
message itself; brands need to pay particular attention to the sources they
choose to utilise. As postmodernist theorists have suggested, consumers are
growing weary of traditional marketing communications strategies, and
celebrity endorsements are no exception. Although this tactic has seen
widespread use across decades and continents in the beauty industry, it may
be time for brands to turn their attention to a new promising course of action:
collaborating with vloggers. Previous literature has proven bloggers’ worth as
message sources, and this research has shone the spotlight on vloggers and
demonstrated their effectiveness. Thanks to their impressive levels of likability
as friendly people and their similarity to viewers as ‘regular’ girls, vloggers are
highly effective in delivering messages to their viewers. They show strong
emotional legitimacy, becoming like true friends to their viewers, as well as
high power, influencing their attitudes and decisions. Moreover, this research
has demonstrated that sponsored content does not trigger a negative
reaction from viewers, meaning that a collaboration strategy would be low
risk for brands, as long as it is carefully handled: viewers value honesty and
transparency.
In a saturated market like the beauty industry, being able to access
and remain in consumers’ minds and hearts through a social influencer is an
invaluable asset for brands. Vloggers dominate beauty on YouTube, creating
the large majority of content (97%) and receiving a much more positive
01/09/2015 78
V01968
reaction from viewers. Brands need to get on the bandwagon soon and
showcase their products through collaborations with vloggers, before being
perceived as out-dated by young consumers. Successful examples to draw
inspiration from include Zoella with Simple skincare, FleurdeForce with
Topshop Beauty makeup and Pixiwoo with Real Techniques makeup brushes.
Content creation on YouTube in collaboration with vloggers or even by the
brand itself should focus on beauty tutorials, as they are the most
appreciated format for beauty videos.
Nevertheless, beauty brands do need to keep in mind that eWOM,
including blog and vlog content, still only represents 10% of all WOM, and
they should not neglect the 90% of WOM that happens offline. However,
eWOM is increasingly growing in strategic importance, and the risk-takers of
today could be the market leaders of tomorrow.
7.3-‐Limitations
Despite careful planning and execution, this dissertation did suffer from
some limitations. Firstly, like all observation-based research methods, the
netnography may have suffered from subjective interpretation on the
researcher’s part. However, as explained in Section IV, its design and
recording were meticulously carried out, limiting observer bias as much as
possible.
In terms of the descriptive research, the experimental questionnaire
may have been too time-consuming for respondents, as suggested by the
rather high number of incomplete responses. Despite the positive results of the
pre-test, subsequent respondents may have found watching two thirty-
second videos too long or irritating. Moreover, a typical limitation of online

01/09/2015 79
V01968
questionnaires involves respondents possibly misinterpreting questions as they
are answering them on their own. However, this questionnaire was designed
to be as clear as possible, therefore significantly limiting this bias.
Finally, the choice of convenience sampling does render results not
completely generalisable. However, as explained in Section IV, the use of
snowballing did increase the pool of respondents beyond the researcher’s
convenience sample.
7.4-‐Future Research
This dissertation has braved new academic territory by extending
research from traditional bloggers to the new type of social influencers that
are vloggers. This is still an extremely nascent research area which will
certainly grow in the future.
The nine sub-attributes studied in this dissertation could be further
scrutinised, particularly in the context of the beauty industry and beauty
vloggers. For example, physical attractiveness could be broken down into
hair colour, hair type, etc. in order to uncover any viewer preferences.
Similarly, personality traits could be studied in order to better understand the
likability sub-attribute.
Although this study has focused on the beauty industry, many other
industries would benefit from similar research. The fashion, technology and
travel sectors also boast ambitious vloggers, to name a few.
01/09/2015 80

An Investigation Into The Rubicon Crossing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

An Investigation Into The Rubicon Crossing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Investigation Into The Rubicon Crossing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cathartics, Didactics, or Altruism?

An Investigation into the Rubicon Crossing

Sophie Tourret - MSc International Marketing - King’s College London

First and foremost I would like to thank my supervisor Jon Wilson

I would also like to thank Dr. Mukherji of King’s College London

Table of Contents

Section III – Research Design ..................................................................... 16

Section IV – Exploratory Research ............................................................. 19

4.2.5-Validity and Reliability ............................................................................ 28

Section V - Descriptive Research .............................................................. 43

5.6.3-Effect of Positive Attitude towards Sources ......................................... 66

Section VI - Discussion ................................................................................ 72

Section VII – Conclusion ............................................................................. 77

Section VIII - Bibliography .......................................................................... 81

List of Figures

Figure Figure Title Page

List of Tables

Table Table Title Page

31 Examples of Articles Using the Experimental Questionnaire 49

List of Appendices

Appendix Appendix Title Page

9 SPSS Outputs for Section 5.6.2.2 112

10 SPSS Outputs for Section 5.6.3.2 113

11 SPSS Outputs for Section 5.6.4.2 114

Section I -­‐ Introduction

to use an effective source to increase the persuasiveness of its message. For

decades, brands’ main choice of non-corporate sources was celebrities

through endorsement contracts. These celebrities made for persuasive

marketing messengers thanks to their undeniable physical attractiveness, high

Goldsmith et al., 2000). Examples of this marketing communications strategy

Woods for Accenture, to name a few.

However, as celebrity scandals and broken contracts grew more and

revelation of his infidelities), brands became weary of this strategy. Moreover,

increasingly met with scepticism and exasperation from consumers. Instead,

and consulted online peer reviews to guide their purchase behaviours

in consumers’ purchase decision processes worldwide (Carl, 2006; Hsu and

and Singh, 2013).

Recently, a new kind of bloggers named ‘vloggers’ (video-bloggers)

primarily on YouTube (www.youtube.com) about their lives, their hobbies and

areas of expertise. In the beauty-sphere, vloggers are an increasingly popular

examples include Zoella (8 million subscribers), Tanya Burr (3 million) and

SprinkleofGlitter (2 million). It is time for beauty brands to pay attention to

their marketing communications strategy.

Kelman’s source theory (1961) and Freeman’s stakeholder theory (1984) to

identify key source attributes. It then draws them together in a conceptual

framework and tests the hypothesised relationships through the use of

exploratory research and an experimental survey. Conclusions about

celebrities and vloggers as marketing sources for beauty brands as well as

managerial recommendations are then discussed.

Section II – Literature Review

exists on this nascent topic. However, a considerable amount of research

analyse this research and extrapolate its findings to the sub-category of

and contrasted with traditional celebrity marketing strategies, and its

grounding in the theories of word-of-mouth and opinion leaders will be

examined. This literature review will then culminate in the creation of a

conceptual framework for the analysis of marketing sources, built on source

and stakeholder theories respectively. Current knowledge on celebrities and

Section I -‐ Introduction

2.1-‐Blogs, Bloggers and Blog Readers

2.1.1-‐What are Blogs?

2.1.3-‐Why Read Blogs?

2.2.2.2-‐Pros and Cons

2.2.2.3-‐Word of Mouth