| Literature DB >> 35814070 |
Abstract
Celebrity influence plays a significant role in fostering the consumers' impulse buying tendency and purchase intention. In the modern advertising era, the celebrity endorsement characteristics have driven the firms' promotion campaigns, stimulating consumer purchasing behavior through celebrity branding. The study signifies the relationship between celebrity's traits of trustworthiness, attractiveness, credibility, and expertise influence consumers' impulse behavior. The data was collected from the 371 customers of the fast fashion industry by using the convenient-sampling technique. SMART-PLS was used for data analysis by applying structural equation modeling. The study results show that celebrity trustworthiness, the attractiveness of a celebrity endorser, the credibility of a celebrity endorser, and celebrity expertise positively impact purchase intention and impulse buying tendency. Purchase intention plays a mediating role between independent and dependent variables.Entities:
Keywords: economic growth; fashion industry; impulse buying tendency; marketing initiatives; purchase intension; sustainability
Year: 2022 PMID: 35814070 PMCID: PMC9263611 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.940649
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1Study framework.
Demographic characteristics.
| Items | Frequency ( | (%) |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Male | 187 | 50.4 |
| Female | 184 | 49.6 |
|
| ||
| Under 20 | 48 | 12.9 |
| 21–30 | 102 | 27.5 |
| 31–40 | 93 | 25.1 |
| 41–50 | 81 | 21.8 |
|
| 47 | 12.7 |
|
| ||
| Intermediate | 66 | 17.8 |
| Bachelor | 138 | 37.2 |
| Master | 105 | 28.3 |
| MPhil/Others | 62 | 16.7 |
|
| ||
| Single | 184 | 49.6 |
| Married | 187 | 50.4 |
Reliability and validity analysis.
| Construct | Items | Loading |
| CR | AVE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attractiveness of Celebrity Endorser | ACE_1 | 0.867 | 0.924 | 0.924 | 0.670 |
| ACE_2 | 0.825 | ||||
| ACE_3 | 0.794 | ||||
| ACE_4 | 0.752 | ||||
| ACE_5 | 0.812 | ||||
| ACE_6 | 0.856 | ||||
| Celebrity Trustworthiness | CTW_1 | 0.833 | 0.894 | 0.894 | 0.679 |
| CTW_2 | 0.801 | ||||
| CTW_3 | 0.825 | ||||
| CTW_4 | 0.836 | ||||
| Credibility of Celebrity Endorser | CCE_1 | 0.782 | 0.917 | 0.917 | 0.688 |
| CCE_2 | 0.860 | ||||
| CCE_3 | 0.842 | ||||
| CCE_4 | 0.877 | ||||
| CCE_5 | 0.783 | ||||
| Celebrity Expertise | CE_1 | 0.788 | 0.886 | 0.886 | 0.661 |
| CE_2 | 0.810 | ||||
| CE_3 | 0.756 | ||||
| CE_4 | 0.892 | ||||
| Purchase Intention | PI_1 | 0.789 | 0.915 | 0.915 | 0.682 |
| PI_2 | 0.853 | ||||
| PI_3 | 0.834 | ||||
| PI_4 | 0.831 | ||||
| PI_5 | 0.821 | ||||
| Impulse Buying Tendency | IBT_1 | 0.832 | 0.860 | 0.860 | 0.672 |
| IBT_2 | 0.802 | ||||
| IBT_3 | 0.824 |
Discriminant validity analysis (Fornel Larcker and HTMT).
| S. No. | Constructs | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Attractiveness of Celebrity Endorser |
| 0.647 | 0.615 | 0.648 | 0.675 | 0.653 |
| 2. | Credibility of Celebrity Endorser | 0.646 |
| 0.628 | 0.648 | 0.669 | 0.646 |
| 3. | Celebrity Expertise | 0.613 | 0.627 |
| 0.629 | 0.666 | 0.631 |
| 4. | Celebrity Trustworthiness | 0.647 | 0.649 | 0.628 |
| 0.662 | 0.643 |
| 5. | Impulse Buying Tendency | 0.676 | 0.670 | 0.666 | 0.662 |
| 0.685 |
| 6. | Purchase Intention | 0.654 | 0.647 | 0.633 | 0.643 | 0.685 |
|
Figure 2Graphical representation of assessment of measurement model.
Hypotheses testing direct effect.
| Hypothesis | Direct relationships | Std. | Std. error |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | CTW → IBT | 0.154 | 0.063 | 2.461 |
|
| H2 | CTW → PI | 0.205 | 0.066 | 3.099 |
|
| H3 | ACE → IBT | 0.199 | 0.076 | 2.629 |
|
| H4 | ACE → PI | 0.247 | 0.057 | 4.304 |
|
| H5 | CCE → IBT | 0.177 | 0.067 | 2.629 |
|
| H6 | CCE → PI | 0.219 | 0.063 | 3.502 |
|
| H7 | CE → IBT | 0.200 | 0.064 | 3.106 |
|
| H8 | CE → PI | 0.215 | 0.063 | 3.385 |
|
| H9 | PI → IBT | 0.215 | 0.067 | 3.224 |
|
Indicates significant path: p < 0.05.
Indicates significant path: p < 0.01.
Indicates significant path: p < 0.001.
Hypotheses testing mediation effect.
| Hypothesis | Indirect relationships | Std. | Std. error |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H9a | CTW → PI → IBT | 0.044 | 0.021 | 2.089 |
|
| H9b | ACE → PI → IBT | 0.053 | 0.021 | 2.525 |
|
| H9c | CCE → PI → IBT | 0.047 | 0.021 | 2.276 |
|
| H9d | CE → PI → IBT | 0.046 | 0.022 | 2.106 |
|
NS, not significant.
Indicates significant path: p < 0.05.
Figure 3Graphical representation of the structural model.