Presentation given at the 1st International Consumer Brand Relationships Conference, http://consumer-brand-relationships.org/ copyright by Colin Campbell

1. 1
How Relationships with
Consumer Ad Creators Develop
and Affect Viewer Response
Colin Campbell
Simon Fraser University
Vancouver, Canada

2. 2
A Definition of CGA
• “any publicly disseminated, consumer generated
advertising messages whose subject is a collectively
recognized brand”
- Berthon et al. (2008, p. 3)
• Refers to videos consumers create, about brands
or products, and share

3. 3
CGA vs.Traditional Ads
Traditional Ads CGA
Creator
Firm,
ad agency
Unknown, consumer
Purpose
Persuade, inform,
remind
Unclear
Distribution
Television, movies,
internet
Internet, viral
Style
Carefully honed,
consistent
Varies

4. 4
Growth in Consumer Generated Advertising

5. 5
Research on CGA
• Hints of advertiser benefit (Freeman and Chapman,
2007a, 2007b)
• Demonstrated ingenuity, skill, and determination of
consumers in constructing CGA (Muniz and Schau,
2007)
• Consumer creativity has been discussed, yet solely
within the realm of consumption experiences
(Burroughs and Mick, 2004; Dahl and Moreau,
2007; Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982; Holbrook, et
al., 1984; Moreau and Dahl, 2005)

6. 6
• Larger goal is to look at how consumer-brand
relationships are important to both creation and
consumption of consumer generated ads
• First steps: examining motivations of creators as
well as response of consumers
• This paper proposes a new theory of why
consumers might respond differently to consumer
generated ads

7. 7
Overview
• Goal is a framework for response to CGA
• How do viewer perceptions of an advertisement’s
creator affect viewer responses?
• Propose a new theoretical approach to
conceptualizing endorsement (Friedman and
Friedman, 1979; McCracken, 1989)
• Draw on social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner,
1979, 1986)

8. 8
Research on Endorsers
• Source credibility (Lafferty and Goldsmith, 1999;
Sternthal, Dholakia and Leavitt, 1978; Sternthal,
Phillips and Dholakia, 1978)
• Source attractiveness (Chaiken, 1979; Kahle and
Homer, 1985)
• Source-product “fit” (Friedman and Friedman,
1979; Kamins and Gupta, 1994; Kamins, 1990;Till
and Busler, 2000)
• Current approach limiting (McCracken, 1989)

9. 9
Traditional Ads
EndorserEndorserEndorserEndorser
ProductProduct
oror
BrandBrand
ProductProduct
oror
BrandBrand
AdAdAdAd ConsumerConsumerConsumerConsumerCompanyCompany
(Sponsor)(Sponsor)
CompanyCompany
(Sponsor)(Sponsor) CreatorCreatorCreatorCreator

10. 10
Proposed Approach
EndorserEndorserEndorserEndorser
ProductProduct
oror
BrandBrand
ProductProduct
oror
BrandBrand
AdAdAdAd ConsumerConsumerConsumerConsumerCompanyCompany
(Sponsor)(Sponsor)
CompanyCompany
(Sponsor)(Sponsor)
CreatorCreatorCreatorCreator

11. 11
Creator as Endorser
• Hints in existing literature that endorser-consumer
fit is what matters (McCracken, 1989)
• Celebrity as referent (Kamins and Gupta, 1994)
• Expertise vs. trustworthiness in credibility
(Sternthal, Dholakia and Leavitt, 1978)
• Applying existing framework to CGA might not
work and could miss a crucial characteristic of
CGA: that it’s made by other consumers

12. 12
Proposed Model
Consumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived Similarity
Consumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer Attraction
Consumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group Identification
Group influence in the form of:Group influence in the form of:
1. Public support1. Public support
2. Ad rating2. Ad rating
Group influence in the form of:Group influence in the form of:
1. Public support1. Public support
2. Ad rating2. Ad rating
Perceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator Motivations
Perceived Group PrestigePerceived Group PrestigePerceived Group PrestigePerceived Group Prestige

13. 13
Similarity Leads
to Attraction
• Theories (e.g. Fiske, 2004; Heider, 1958; Rushton,
1989) link similarity and attraction
• Supported by findings for both perceived and
actual similarity (Cronbach, 1955)
1. Viewers will be more attracted to advertisement
creators that viewers deem similar
2. Perceived motivations of creator will moderate
this perceived-creator similarity and attraction

14. 14
Proposed Model
Consumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived Similarity
Consumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer Attraction
Consumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group Identification
Group influence in the form of:Group influence in the form of:
1. Public support1. Public support
2. Ad rating2. Ad rating
Group influence in the form of:Group influence in the form of:
1. Public support1. Public support
2. Ad rating2. Ad rating
Perceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator Motivations
Perceived Group PrestigePerceived Group PrestigePerceived Group PrestigePerceived Group Prestige

15. 15
Social Identity Theory
• Primarily from Tajfel and Turner (1986)
• Individuals have social identity rooted in their
membership in social groups
• Role of social categories, social groups, social
identity, self-categorization, self-enhancement
• Importance of ranking, hyperbolized similarity and
differences, negative groups, self-esteem
• Contrast with internalization

16. 16
Attraction Leads
to Identification
3. The more a viewer considers an ad creator’s
perceived social group’s identity to match their
own, the greater the attraction, and hence the
greater the identification with the social group.
4. The more prestigiously an ad creator’s perceived
social group is perceived by others, the greater the
attraction, and hence the greater the identification
with the social group.

17. 17
Proposed Model
Consumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived Similarity
Consumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer Attraction
Consumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group Identification
Group influence in the form of:Group influence in the form of:
1. Public support1. Public support
2. Ad rating2. Ad rating
Group influence in the form of:Group influence in the form of:
1. Public support1. Public support
2. Ad rating2. Ad rating
Perceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator Motivations
Perceived Group PrestigePerceived Group PrestigePerceived Group PrestigePerceived Group Prestige

18. 18
Identification
and Influence
• Kelman (1961, p. 63) describes social influence:
“when an individual adopts behavior derived from
another person or a group because this behavior is
associated with a satisfying self-defining
relationship to this person or group.”
• Act publicly and privately in line with group’s
expectations - purely to retain membership
• Links suggested (Ashforth and Mael, 1989; Dutton
et al., 1994; Curras-Perez et al., 2009)

19. 19
Identification
and Influence
5. The more a viewer identifies with an ad creator’s
perceived social group, the more likely the viewer
is to engage in activities that demonstrate and
support this identification, either privately or
publicly (e.g. forward link to ad, comment on ad,
rate ad, book ad).
6. The more a viewer identifies with an ad creator’s
perceived social group, the higher the perception
of the advertisement and the brand.

20. 20
Proposed Model
Consumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived SimilarityConsumer-Consumer Perceived Similarity
Consumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer AttractionConsumer-Consumer Attraction
Consumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group IdentificationConsumer-Group Identification
Group influence in the form of:Group influence in the form of:
1. Public support1. Public support
2. Ad rating2. Ad rating
Group influence in the form of:Group influence in the form of:
1. Public support1. Public support
2. Ad rating2. Ad rating
Perceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator MotivationsPerceived Creator Motivations
Perceived Group PrestigePerceived Group PrestigePerceived Group PrestigePerceived Group Prestige

21. 21
Conclusion
• Proposed a new approach to understanding
endorsement so as to help explain consumer
response to CGA
• Currently testing parts of the theory
• Future research in looking at negative ads, the
effect of ensuing consumer discussions, ads with
multiple brands, and more ambiguous videos.