THE EFFECT OF YOUTUBE INFLUENCER
MARKETING ON MILLENNIALS WITHIN
THE BEAUTY INDUSTRY: AN
EXPLORATORY STUDY
University of Portsmouth
BA (Hons) Business and Management
Joanna Miguens
2016
UP483845
ii
Title: The Effect of YouTube Influencer Marketing on Millennials Within the Beauty
Industry: An Exploratory Study
Joanna Miguens
BA (Hons) Business and Management
May 2016
Word Count: 10,698
UP483845
iii
Statement of Originality
I, the undersigned, declare that this dissertation is my own original work, and I give
permission for it to be photocopied and made available for inter-library loan.
NAME:…………………………………………………..
SIGNED:………………………………………………...
DATE:……………………………………………………
UP483845
iv
“I believe the next Oprah Winfrey or George Lucas will not come from a local news desk or
college film program. He or she will come from the world of the web. Where the bar to entry
is low, and where a group of kids can dream up a story and shoot it in their backyards.
Regardless of whether someone gave them permission or not.”
Felicia Day
Author of You’re Never Weird on the Internet (Almost)
UP483845
v
Acknowledgements
Firstly, I would like to thank Helen. Without whom I would not have had the strength to
finish my studies.
A special thank you goes to Mum, Dad and Ed for supporting me through my extensive
university career.
And Danny, for the endless read-throughs, words of support and cups of tea. You keep me
sane.
UP483845
vi
Abstract
Influencer marketing is becoming increasingly prevalent on YouTube, giving a large amount
of power to electronic Word-of-Mouth. While the use of third party influence on YouTube
continues to rise it will be more difficult for consumers to assess the credibility of a message
and the trustworthiness of the source. The aims of this dissertation are to explore the social
construct behind the phenomenon to aid marketers in getting their message through the noise.
The research was conducted using focus groups, which resulted in a richer understanding of
the attitudes of the consumer. Recommendations have been made to ensure results are
maximised from eWOM mentions.
UP483845
vii
Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS VABSTRACT VI
CHAPTER ONE RESEARCH AIMS AND INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 RATIONALE 11.2 RESEARCH AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 21.3 INTRODUCTION 4
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 9
2.1 EWOM 92.1.1 TWO-STEP FLOW OF COMMUNICATION 102.1.2 DIFFUSION OF INNOVATIONS 112.1.3 OPINION LEADERS 122.1.4 MOTIVATION TO SHARE ONLINE 132.2 EWOM CREDIBILITY 142.2.1 SOURCE CREDIBILITY MODEL 142.2.2 SOURCE CHARACTERISTICS 162.2.3 THE MEANING TRANSFER MODEL 172.2.4 PARASOCIAL INTERACTION 172.2.5 POPULARITY EFFECT 182.3 VALENCE IN EWOM 192.3.1 NEGATIVITY BIAS 192.3.2 POSITIVITY BIAS 202.3.3 VALENCE INTENSITY 202.4 CORPORATE INFLUENCE IN YOUTUBE 202.4.1 SPONSORED CONTENT 212.4.2 BLOG NARRATIVE 212.4.3 EFFECT OF THIRD-PARTY INFLUENCE ON CREDIBILITY 222.5 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW 22
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY 24
3.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 243.2 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY AND APPROACH 253.3 SAMPLING 263.4 RESEARCH STRATEGY 273.5 LIMITATIONS OF STUDY 283.6 RESEARCH ETHICS 29
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 30
4.1 VIEWING HABITS 304.2 POPULARITY EFFECT 314.3 REVIEW VALENCE 314.4 EFFECT ON PURCHASE BEHAVIOUR 324.5 RESULTS CATEGORISED BY RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 334.5.1 HOW DO FEMALE MILLENNIALS RESPOND TO ORGANIC VERSUS SPONSORED MENTIONS OF A PRODUCT OR BRAND? 334.5.2 IF THE VIEWERS EXHIBIT PARASOCIAL INTERACTIONS, IS THERE A GREATER EFFECT ON CONSUMER ATTITUDES? 344.5.3 DOES THE SOURCE AFFECT THE TWO-STEP PROCESS AND PURCHASE INTENTION IN BEAUTY VIDEOS? 35
UP483845
viii
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 37
5.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 375.2 CONCLUSION OF FINDINGS 375.2.1. MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS 395.3 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 39
BIBLIOGRAPHY 40
APPENDICES 47
APPENDIX 1 – FOCUS GROUP QUESTIONS 47APPENDIX 2 – FOCUS GROUP RESULTS 48FOCUS GROUP ONE RESULTS 48FOCUS GROUP TWO RESULTS 59
UP483845
ix
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
FIGURE1-ZOELLA'SSTATSPAGEONGLEAMFUTURES(GLEAMFUTURES,N.D.) 5FIGURE2–ORGANICANDAMPLIFIEDEWOM(KULMALA,MESIRANTA,&TUOMINEN,2013) 6TABLE1–GUIDELINESADAPTEDFROMCAMPAIGNMAGAZINE(ALDRIDGE,2015) 8FIGURE3-TWOSTEPFLOWOFCOMMUNICATIONMODEL(SCHIFFMAN,KANUK,&HANSEN,2013) 10FIGURE4-MULTISTEPFLOWOFCOMMUNICATIONMODEL(SCHIFFMAN,KANUK,&HANSEN,2013) 10FIGURE5-S-CURVEOFCUMULATIVEADOPTERS(TROTT,2012) 11FIGURE6-BREADTHOFKNOWLEDGE(DOSS&CARSTENS,2014) 12TABLE2-PROFILEOFOPINIONLEADERS(SCHIFFMAN,KANUK,&HANSEN,2013,P.396) 13FIGURE7-OHANIAN'S15-POINTSOURCECREDIBILITYSCALE(OHANIAN,1991;CHARBONNEAU&GARLAND,2010) 15FIGURE8–MEANINGTRANSFERMODEL(MCCRACKEN,1989) 17TABLE3-OVERVIEWOFRESEARCHPHILOSOPHIES(SAUNDERS,LEWIS,ÞHILL,2009,P.119) 26TABLE4-MINIMUMNON-PROBABILITYSAMPLESIZE.ADAPTEDFROM(SAUNDERS,LEWIS,ÞHILL,2015,P.297) 27
UP483845
1
CHAPTER ONE
RESEARCH AIMS AND INTRODUCTION
1.1 Rationale
There has been a global shift in the way consumers view celebrity endorsement of a brand
due to the rise of social media and the new breed of influencers it has created. Typically,
celebrity endorsements have dominated the world of traditional marketing; becoming such a
normal practice that the oxymoron of using celebrity endorsements for fast food brands; such
as the use of Venus and Serena Williams as the face of Triple Double Stuffed Oreo (Feloni,
2014), occurred without question. Online influencers are the social media extension of these
celebrity endorsers. Online influencers have particular effect in the beauty market, with 29%
of consumers in this industry visiting a blogger or vlogger for advice on brands (Tesseras,
2014). A video blogger, or “vlogger” as they have come to be known, is someone who films
their thoughts and observations, which they then post online in the form of a video blog, or
‘vlog’, for followers to view (Chawla, 2014).
The Millennial generation have been defined as the first generation to be born into the digital
world (Investopedia, n.d.). Millennials – those born between 1980 and 2000 (Donnelly &
Scaff, 2016) - employ technology to stay connected to their social networks (Eastman, Iyer,
Liao-Troth, Williams, & Griffin, 2014) and are not tech savvy, but tech-dependent (Dorsey,
n.d.). Two-fifths of British women watch beauty tutorials online (Wiseman, 2014) and look
to reduce the risk of purchasing unsuitable products for themselves (Mims, 2011).
BuzzMyVideos’ Online Video Barometer, conducted by OnePoll, found that 98% of 16-45
year olds have positive feelings towards beauty products featured in online videos (Edwards,
2015). As the power of these influencers are being recognised, new businesses are forming to
become ‘Social Talent Agencies’ (Gleam Futures, n.d.). Gleam Futures, based in London
manages a selection of the UK’s top YouTubers and provides the channel for brands to bea
able to work easily with the vloggers.
UP483845
2
Mintel’s report on Social Media in the Beauty and Personal Care (BPC) Industry found that
70% of social media users have viewed beauty content online in the last six months (Mintel,
2015), meaning there is a new way to reach consumers outside of traditional marketing
practices. Guy Parker, chief executive of the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has
stressed that technology is “dramatically changing advertising” and that the boundaries
between advertising and content are “blurring” (Degun, 2015). Marketers must now choose
to either pay for creative control or instead build genuine relationships with vloggers they
wish to work with (Aldridge, 2015). Due to vloggers’ perceived expertise and objectiveness,
their opinions have an extensive impact on their viewers’ purchasing decisions (Mir &
Rehman, 2013), this is due to the perceived credibility of content having a positive impact on
user opinions.
Substantial amounts of academics have researched the effects of source characteristics,
parasocial interactions and organic versus sponsored blog posts on consumer behaviour.
However, this study will look at how marketers can use this new “celebrity vlogger” status to
increase consumer perceptions of their brand by helping them to understand the thought
process of the consumer behind the phenomenon of online opinion leaders.
1.2 Research Aims and Objectives
This research will aid marketers in their decision making process when deciding how best to
raise awareness of their product or brand using new age celebrity vloggers. It will identify
whether message effectiveness is increased if the information takes an organic or sponsored
format and whether the source has a direct impact on the effectiveness of the message.
The research has two main objectives:
• To explore how female Millennials respond to organic versus sponsored product
mentions on YouTube
• To explore the effect of parasocial relationships and the two-step process in
consumer attitudes and purchase behaviour.
UP483845
3
From the literature review conducted; three research questions have been designed to ensure
the research meets these objectives. These can be found in Chapter 3.
UP483845
4
1.3 Introduction
Influencer marketing, defined as “a form of marketing that identifies and targets individuals
with influence over potential buyers” (Wong, 2014) has become prominent in the world of
social media, where information can be seen by millions of people. Social media has changed
the balance of power between consumers and brands, whereby peer recommendations now
play a much bigger part in purchasing decisions (Wong, 2014; Lee, Cheung, Lim, & Sia,
2006). This is especially relevant when marketing to Millennials, where there is a high
prevalence of influencers; this is particularly on platforms such as YouTube where
influencers can amass millions of followers. These influencers can affect public opinion on a
brand. As we will be focusing on the consumer perceptions in relation to a brand; a consumer
focused definition is most appropriate. According to Ambler (1992; cited by Wood, 2000,
p.664) a brand is:
“the promise of the bundles of attributes that someone buys and provide satisfaction . . . The
attributes that make up a brand may be real or illusory, rational or emotional, tangible or
invisible.”
This definition highlights the importance of the body of associations to a brand name. It is
important for marketers to understand how an influencer association can affect the brand.
This dissertation will be exploring how YouTube vloggers can influence followers.
Word-of-Mouth (WOM) is defined by Arndt (1967, p. 291) as: “oral, person-to-person
communication between a receiver and a communicator whom the receiver perceives as non-
commercial, regarding a brand, product or service”. Conversely, Alexander (1964; cited by
Buttle, 1998, p. 243) defines advertising as: “any paid form of non-personal presentation of
ideas, goods or services by an identified sponsor”. As the line between the two begins to blur
for consumers it has become difficult to judge the motivation for the vlogger to share online.
Viewers may struggle to judge whether the vlogger is discussing a brand because they like it
and wish to share their experience or whether they are being paid to advertise the brand.
UP483845
5
The rise of the beauty vlogger has occurred in recent years, with the most popular now
adopting a celebrity status. Some notable names include: Zoella, the most popular YouTuber
in the UK (Oakes, 2015) (10.4 million subscribers (Zoella, n.d.)), Michelle Phan (8.5 million
subscribers (Michelle Phan, n.d.)) and Tanya Burr (3.5 million subscribers (Pixi2woo, n.d.)).
They all use multiple social media channels to connect with their audience. Zoella became
the first vlogger to appear on the cover of a mainstream magazine. When she announced to
her online community that she was shooting Company’s cover, their online traffic increased
87% (Wiseman, 2014), this highlights the power these influencers can have on their audience
and that marketers need to find the best way to utilise this.
Here, we will be looking at the effect of the modern celebrity on the advertising decisions
that must be taken by marketers. According to McCracken (1989, p. 310), a celebrity
endorser is: “any individual who enjoys public recognition and who uses this recognition on
behalf of a consumer good by appearing with it in an advertisement”. Erdogan (1999)
highlighted that the reason celebrities succeed in advertising products is because they endorse
it with both their name and their credibility; highlighting the benefits for consumers.
Product-related and brand-related electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) influences readers
attitudes and buying behaviour (Chevalier & Mayzlin, 2006; Huang & Chen, 2006; Hu, Liu,
& Zhang, 2008) and moves exclusive control of the diffusion of information away from the
Figure 1 - Zoella's Stats Page on Gleam Futures (Gleam Futures, n.d.)
UP483845
6
marketer (Lee, Cheung, Lim, & Sia, 2006). This shift of power away from the marketer to the
influencer means that the vlogger has the power to change the message being portrayed
regarding the brand.
There are two main parties in the diffusion of information, the audience (receiver) and the
opinion leader (source). In the case of the celebrity beauty vlogger, they adopt the role of
opinion leader, often sharing their content with millions of consumers.
Figure 2 – Organic and amplified eWOM (Kulmala, Mesiranta, & Tuominen, 2013)
Kulmala et al. (2013) highlight the influence marketers can have on eWOM content. Here it
can be seen that the marketer can have a direct effect on the amplified (sponsored) content
(highlighted in purple). This takes the form of a paid advert; it can be seen in Table 1 (see
page 7) how amplified content must be acknowledged.
Organic eWOM occurs naturally when a person shares their own experiences (Kulmala,
Mesiranta, & Tuominen, 2013) regarding a product/service or a brand. With regards to
beauty vloggers, this can take the form of product reviews, “hauls” and make-up tutorials.
Vloggers use products they have either bought themselves or been gifted by marketers as a
free sample (Ryu & Feick, 2007; cited by Kulmala, Mesiranta, & Tuominen, 2013), to
theoretically influence consumer opinion. It can be seen in Figure 1 that the vlogger has
UP483845
7
complete control over their organic eWOM and the marketer has no effect over the message
being portrayed.
Social media has allowed consumers to engage in brand-related eWOM and has emerged as a
promotional tool for marketing (McCarthy et al., 2014), the internet has allowed consumers
to share experiences online in a way parallel to how they do offline (Steffes & Burgee, 2009).
YouTube, the video sharing website, allows anyone to upload a video that could be seen by
an unlimited amount of viewers. YouTubers have their own channel where they upload their
videos; once a video has been uploaded it will notify their subscribers. YouTube also
recommends videos based on viewers’ habits. YouTube has 1 billion unique visitors a month
with the largest age group of users being between 18 and 29 years old (Langley, 2014).
Nonverbal information refers to the use of multiple channels for communicating information
(Johnson, Kumar, & Bruner Il, 2006), Yoo, Kim and Sanders (2015) suggest that building
eWOM systems with visual auditory factors is very important for customer decision support
satisfaction, this is critical when studying YouTube, where videos are the medium used to
share information. As media continues to evolve rapidly, eWOM can reach huge numbers of
consumers at an extremely rapid rate. It can influence consumer attitudes, sales (Chevalier &
Mayzlin, 2006) and product judgements (Lee & Youn, 2009). According to Marketing Week
magazine (Langley, 2014); influence can be measured using the following:
“Influence = Audience Reach (# of followers) x Brand Affinity (expertise and credibility) x
Strength of Relationship with Followers”
For marketers to maximise the influence when their brand is mentioned, audience reach,
brand affinity and the strength of the relationship between the vlogger and their followers
should be carefully considered. This research will look at the relationship of these factors,
along with the effect of organic and sponsored content.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) states that: “Marketing communications must be
obviously identifiable as such”, and: “Marketers and publishers must make clear that
advertorials are marketing communications; for example, by heading them ‘advertisement
feature’” (Making ads clear: The challenge for advertisers and vloggers, 2014). These rules
were tightened following a campaign by Oreo, whereby several UK vloggers were paid to
feature Oreo biscuits, although none of the videos were labelled as an advert. This led to
UP483845
8
Mondelez, the biscuit company, announcing that they would not show the videos again
(BBC, 2014).
Below are guidelines set out by Campaign Magazine (Aldridge, 2015) to ensure brands meet
the new rules outlined by the ASA and to help them utilise vlogger marketing:
Table 1 – Guidelines adapted from Campaign magazine (Aldridge, 2015)
What this means for marketers is that, if they would like the final creative sign off, they will
have to pay, and the above ASA regulations will apply. Alternatively, they can sacrifice
control and allow the vlogger to form, and voice their own opinions about the brand.
UP483845
9
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature review has been conducted to present appropriate academic literature on
modern day influencers and the effect of organic versus sponsored content. A detailed
examination will be conducted on the effect of source (reviewer) credibility and the driving
forces for sharing reviews. It will further examine the effects of valence in eWOM and will
break down the use of third-party influence.
The following literature review is conducted in order to aid the researcher in answering the
research questions and meeting the research objectives proposed in Chapter 1 of this study.
2.1 EWOM
WOM, defined as interpersonal communication about products and services between
consumers, affects the message effectiveness, and consumer evaluations of reviewed goods
(Arndt, 1967; Hong & Park, 2012; Park & Kim, 2008). eWOM is typically independent of
marketers influence, therefore it is considered to be more trustworthy and credible (Bickart &
Schindler, 2001; Bone, 1995; Lau & Ng, 2001). eWOM refers to any statement made by
consumers about a product/service or brand, which is made available to large number of
people via the internet (Hennig-Thurau, et al., 2004). Due to the advancements of technology
and social media, consumer-generated advertising has allowed marketers a new way to reach
consumers. eWOM has changed the way consumers interact with each other, with brands,
and the way that they purchase products or services. The communication of eWOM can
happen in a range of ways, such as social networking and review websites (Hennig-Thurau,
Gwinner, Walsh, & Gremler, 2004). Online reviews function as an informant by providing
user-orientated product information and also as a method to deliver recommendations from
previous consumers (Park & Kim, 2008).
eWOM has the ability to spread further and faster than traditional WOM (Chaterjee, 2001)
and can be available to an unlimited audience (Alon, Brunel, & Schneier Siegal, 2005).
UP483845
10
2.1.1 Two-Step Flow of Communication
The two-step flow of communication is a theory developed by Katz and Lazarsfeld (1955).
The model predicts that the public’s attitudes will be affected indirectly by the media via
influential opinion leaders who relay the message to their personal networks (Katz &
Lazarsfeld, 1955). These opinion leaders are regarded as credible and knowledgeable about
their specific topics. This was further developed upon by Katz (1957), who found that
influencers and the members of their social network are typically alike, and that members are
often as interested in the subject as the opinion leader. Opinion leadership is attributed based
upon the features of personal involvement, product familiarity, and public individuation
(Chan & Misra, 1990). Information is represented as flowing one way, whereby the opinion
leaders transmit information from impersonal media sources to the masses, often with their
own interpretation of the information.
Figure 3 - Two step flow of communication model (Schiffman, Kanuk, & Hansen, 2013)
In more recent years the two step model has been more widely accepted as the multistep
theory of communication, whereby information flow is multi-directional and opinion leaders
may seek information from opinion receivers.
Figure 4 - Multi step flow of communication model (Schiffman, Kanuk, & Hansen, 2013)
UP483845
11
The multistep theory is more relevant when examining influencer marketing on YouTube, as
communication flow is multidirectional between opinion leaders and their followers. It also
highlights that information can be received via the traditional media, alongside information
received through opinion leaders.
2.1.2 Diffusion of Innovations
Even in the world of social media, the theory of diffusion of innovations (Rogers, 2003) can
be applied. The S-curve of cumulative adopters helps to understand how information can be
spread. This is particularly relevant to the study of celebrity beauty vloggers as they are a
new breed of influencers, or innovators. Targeting these innovators allows the information to
move further along the curve.
Figure 5 - S-curve of cumulative adopters (Trott, 2012)
eWOM has been acknowledged as a critical tool for facilitating information diffusion through
online communities (Sun et al., 2006). It is critical for marketers to understand the social
network of their chosen opinion leader, as this will enable the diffusion of information to
those adopters they are targeting. Online information spread happens at an unprecedented
speed, and can be seen by thousands within minutes.
UP483845
12
However, the S-curve does not account for the complexity of information spread. It assumes
that decision making will be rational, which may not always be the case when looking at
decisions based-upon celebrity endorsements.
2.1.3 Opinion Leaders
Research into the effect of opinion leaders has, in more recent years, focused on increased
specificity of different types of opinion leaders: market mavens (Feick & Price, 1987),
opinion leaders (Schiffman, Kanuk, & Hansen, 2013; Blackwell, Miniard, & Engel, 2006)
and brand evangelists (Doss & Carstens, 2014). Figure 5 shows the breadth of knowledge
held by each, with regards to knowledge of the market and products.
A maven is a person who enjoys advising friends on new products (Feick & Price, 1987) and
it is the social interaction of a maven which gives them their power. Mavens have a wide
understanding of a market and multiple products and brands within it (Feick & Price, 1987).
Conversely, brand evangelists have the smallest range of knowledge, although an in-depth
knowledge relating to a specific product or brand, and often this is in the form of a
commitment to a product or brand (Doss & Carstens, 2014).
Figure 6 - Breadth of Knowledge (Doss & Carstens, 2014)
UP483845
13
Opinion leaders are considered to be essential in the diffusion of innovation due to the social
networks around them. It is critical to select the relevant opinion leaders for a product, so that
marketing messages can be tailored to encourage them to communicate with their followers
and influence their behaviour. A profile of attributes has been suggested by Schiffman,
Kanuk and Hansen (2013):
Table 2 - Profile of Opinion Leaders (Schiffman, Kanuk, & Hansen, 2013, p. 396)
Although it is difficult to construct a generalised profile of an opinion leader, research has
suggested specific traits. According to Rogers (2003), there are three traits which characterise
opinion leaders (also called ‘influentials’): social participation, social status and
cosmopolitanism. This was further built upon by Blackwell et al. (2006), who claimed that
influentials tend to be more innovative, gregarious, fashion conscious, independent, and
active in their information search.
It is now necessary to determine whether these attributes enhance the message effectiveness
or disturb it. Do the attributes of the brand need to correspond to those of the vlogger?
2.1.4 Motivation to Share Online
It is important to understand what might drive consumers to share online, there have been
several studies looking at motives (Cheung & Lee, 2012; Chu & Sung, 2015; Hennig-Thurau,
UP483845
14
et al., 2004). Identifying motives to share online enables companies to understand which
bloggers would be best to supply products too. Hennig-Thurau et al. (2004) found that the
major factors which drive online review sharing are the desire for social interaction,
economic incentives, and an increase in social status. These driving factors means that
reviewers may be highly likely to accept paid sponsorship from brands and move away from
the traditional, organic posts. Cheung and Lee (2012) found that consumers’ eWOM
intention is significantly related to three antecedents: reputation, sense of belonging and
enjoyment of helping. Giving advice and tips to readers shows concern for others and
provides benefits to those who read the advice (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2004). If a marketer
can identify the motivation for celebrity vloggers, they may be able to encourage organic
posts regarding their brand. Furthermore, perceived motivation factors could affect consumer
perceptions of credibility and trustworthiness.
2.2 EWOM CREDIBILITY
The views expressed in user-generated content (UGC) are considered higher in credibility
than marketer generated content (Kulmala, Mesiranta, & Tuominen, 2013; Lange-Faria &
Elliot, 2012; Libai, et al., 2010), it has been found that 85% of 500 UK consumers between
16-45 years of age would trust a review by a YouTuber over any other method of advertising
(Edwards, 2015). However, it has also been argued that online reviews are less credible due
to lack of rigorous editorial processes for factual verification (Chevalier & Mayzlin, 2006).
Consumers are often forced to use heuristic cues to assess the credibility of eWOM content, it
is difficult for readers to assess the credibility, so marketers should try and ease this for
audiences (Reichelt, Sievert, & Jacob, 2014; Steffes & Burgee, 2009). There is much
research into the main factors used to determine the extent to which consumers trust eWOM
content. Expertise and trustworthiness are the two main dimensions that affect source
credibility. If eWOM is perceived as credible, it will have a greater impact on audience
behaviour (Chu & Kamal, 2008; Reichelt, Sievert, & Jacob, 2014; Zhang & Watts, 2008).
2.2.1 Source Credibility Model
The Source Credibility Model asserts that endorsers exhibiting expertise and reliability are
credible and, to that extent, persuasive. The source credibility model has been built around
UP483845
15
studies in social psychology (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953; Hovland & Weiss, 1951).
Hovland (1951) proposes that message effectiveness depends upon perceived level of
“expertise” and “trustworthiness” of the source. The model stresses that endorsers who
exhibit expertise and reliability are credible, and therefore persuasive (Hovland & Weiss,
1951; Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). Furthermore, Lis (2013) also found that expertise and
trustworthiness were the most significant factors. If a consumer perceives the endorser as a
credible message source, the review effect will be heightened, prompting those who consume
the message to have better brand perception.
Additionally, Ohanian (1990) (1991), suggested that message effectiveness relies upon
perceived source credibility (whereby credibility is a combination of trustworthiness and
expertise) and perceived attractiveness (Charbonneau & Garland, 2010).
Figure 7 - Ohanian's 15-point source credibility scale (Ohanian, 1991; Charbonneau & Garland, 2010)
It can be argued that both of these models (Hovland & Weiss, 1951) (Ohanian, 1991) are
restrictive in their approach, assuming that message effectiveness is based purely upon the
characteristics of the endorser and doesn’t take other factors into account.
Furthermore, whether this can be applied to a female Millennial market is yet to be found,
with the average age of this sample being 34.5 years (Lis, 2013), it can be argued that these
results will not be replicated in a younger sample group. The results found by both Hovland
and Weiss (1951) and Ohanian (1991) may also be outdated so is not certain that this is still
applicable today.
UP483845
16
2.2.2 Source Characteristics
The anonymous nature of online reviews makes it difficult for consumers to determine the
levels of quality and trustworthiness of the eWOM (Lee & Youn, 2009) It has been argued
that source characteristics had a greater impact on purchase decision and eWOM
trustworthiness than message content. Forman et al. (2008) found that a reviewers’ disclosure
of identity-descriptive information to supplement or substitute product information had a
significant impact on making a purchase decision and evaluating the helpfulness of an online
review. Transparency with profile information, such as names, location and personal interests
increases credibility (Forman, Ghose, & Wiesenfeld, 2008; Reichelt, Sievert, & Jacob, 2014).
Additionally, it has also been argued that consumers are more likely to trust and adopt
information from sources whom they perceive to be homophilous to themselves (Reichelt,
Sievert, & Jacob, 2014). It was found by Shan and King (2015) that source trustworthiness
can be encouraged by the perceptions that the source has similar attributes to the consumer,
such as demographics, attitudes and backgrounds. Furthermore, they found that a higher
prestige source elicited higher trustworthiness than a lower prestige source (Shan & King,
2015). Conversely, Hagel and Armstrong (1997) suggest that those searching for information
online are not interested in expert knowledge, but are looking for advice from a diverse group
of people.
Willemsen et al. (2012) identified two routes to perceived source expertise and
trustworthiness, with the route to perceived expertise stemming from self-proclaimed experts,
whereas the route to perceived trustworthiness stemmed from laypersons (someone who
claims little knowledge of the product being reviewed). However, rated experts were
identified as the only source that connects both routes to obtain an overall high score for
source credibility.
With regards to social media, it has been argued that there is an interaction between source
authority (whether or not the source is an expert) and bandwagon effects (the number of
followers) with a strong link trustworthiness, content credibility, and behavioural intentions
(Lee & Sundar, 2012). This suggests that brands should be working with the vloggers with
the highest number of followers, but more research is needed into whether this is most
effective.
UP483845
17
2.2.3 The Meaning Transfer Model
McCracken (1989) uses the term ‘meaning’ to describe consumers’ assessments of what a
celebrity represents, based on characteristics such as social class, age, personality and
lifestyle.
Figure 8 – Meaning Transfer Model (McCracken, 1989)
Quite possibly one of the most successful sponsorships is that of Gary Lineker by Walkers
Crisps. Those characteristics typically associated with Gary Lineker get projected onto the
product.
However, these characteristics being transferred can be problematic at times. For example,
Zoella recently hit headlines amid rumours that her best-selling novel was ghostwritten. This
characteristic of being untrustworthy could be transferred to the brand.
2.2.4 Parasocial Interaction
Horton and Wohl (1956) define parasocial interaction as the “illusion of a face-to-face
interaction between media figures and their audience”. Most research into parasocial
interaction has focused on traditional media such as television (Schiappa, Allen, & Gregg,
2007) and radio, but it is now applicable to online relationships. Vlogging is a form of social
activity, whereby the media figures and their audience have the ability to interact with each
other easily. As previously discussed, a key motivation for eWOM is the desire to be engaged
in social interaction (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2004). Parasocial relationships emulate social
UP483845
18
relationships, as they exhibit the same psychological characteristics, this can lead to the
viewer responding to the vlogger as if they were their friend. Beauty vloggers are often
young, attractive, and only put the best parts of their lives on the screen. As women tend to
form parasocial relationships with those who they wish to look like or emulate the life of
(Greenwood, Pietromonaco, & Long, 2008), perceived attractiveness is an indicator of
parasocial interaction. This is amplified when viewers believe the vlogger is a credible source
and interpersonal trust has been built, by the vlogger disclosing identity descript information.
This idealisation of the physical appearance and lifestyle of the vlogger should be utilised by
marketers. Attractive influencers are more likely to have a positive impact on brand attitude
and purchase intention. This would suggest that those vloggers that were perceived to be
more credible would have viewers develop a parasocial relationship, and therefore their
purchase intentions would be more affected by the vloggers opinions. This study will further
explore whether parasocial interactions has an affect on viewers attitudes and purchase
behaviour.
2.2.5 Popularity Effect
The number of reviews is also an important factor influencing consumers’ evaluations of
online reviews and the recommended products (Chen, Wu, & Yoon, 2004; Duan, Gu, &
Whinston, 2008). The sheer quantity of reviews can indicate product popularity, regardless of
the valence of the review. This is known as popularity effect (Jeong & Koo, 2015), where the
increase in the amount of information for available to consumers has a direct effect on their
attitudes towards a brand. Consumers can mitigate the risk of a purchase where they may
have little to no product knowledge by gathering as much information as possible. The
increase in information leads to an increase in trustworthiness for the delivered message
(Chen, Wu, & Yoon, 2004), this is confirmed by Jalilvand and Samiei (2012) who found that
general use of eWOM has a positive influence on attitudes towards a tourist destination,
subjective norm, behavioural control, and travel intention. However, this hasn’t been
explored in an environment where the information is typically organic but has now become
monetised.
UP483845
19
2.3 VALENCE IN EWOM
The valence of eWOM communication (ie. positive, negative or neutral) has been extensively
studied. A neutral review provides the reader with descriptive information about the product
or service without any evaluative direction. A positive review provides information that
evaluates the object positively, and vice versa for a negative review. While research has
conclusively found review valence has a significant impact on consumer behaviours (brand
attitude, purchase intent, product sales), the findings have been equivocal.
2.3.1 Negativity Bias
It has been widely found that negative reviews have a disproportionately greater influence on
consumers than positive reviews, indicating a negativity bias (Ballantine & Yeung, 2015;
Chevalier & Mayzlin, 2006; Li & Hitt, 2008). Therefore, companies aim to minimize the
occurrence of negative reviews (Chevalier & Mayzlin, 2006). If an organisation attempts to
mitigate the presence of negative eWOM it can force readers to question whether the eWOM
is being manipulated by the marketer (Chevalier & Mayzlin, 2006). However, that study
focused on mass book reviews by consumers on websites such as Amazon.com. This
negative bias may be reduced when information is coming from an opinion leader, rather than
other consumers en-mass.
Negative reviews tend to be more scarce than positive reviews, which could be the reason for
negative reviews being perceived as more credible than positive reviews (Lee & Koo, 2012).
Furthermore, prospect theory can add to the explanation of negativity bias, suggesting that
losses loom larger than gains (Lee, Park, & Han, 2008). Negative reviews that are well
written can mitigate risk by ensuring consumers understand the worst possible scenario when
purchasing the product and actually increase sales (Mims, 2011).
It is yet to be explored how this negative bias may affect beauty brands when they are
appealing to female Millennials. Will a trusted source affect the bias brought about by
negative reviews?
UP483845
20
2.3.2 Positivity Bias
In contrast, some studies suggest a positivity effect (Clemons, Gao, & Hitt, 2006; Lee,
Rodgers, & Kim, 2009), although these are much less widely studied. Wang, Cunningham
and Eastin (2015) found that a positive review has the greatest effect on consumers’ attitude
toward the review, product and purchase intention. However, the trustworthiness and
authenticity of the review can be at risk if there is too much positive information as the
consumer may question the reviewers’ motives (Doh & Hwang, 2009; Schindler & Bickart,
2012). However, Cheung, Luo, Sia and Chen (2009) found that message valence has no
impact on message credibility.
2.3.3 Valence Intensity
It is important to note that the valence intensity and extremity of product reviews has a strong
impact on consumer brand attitudes (Ballantine & Yeung, 2015; Lee, Rodgers, & Kim,
2009). Lee, Rodgers and Kim (2009) found that extremely positive reviews increase brand
attitudes, although even a moderate amount of negativity negated this effect. Furthermore, it
has been found (Ballantine & Yeung, 2015; Floh, Koller, & Zauner, 2013) that strongly
positive reviews generated higher levels of purchase intentions, but a review with a weak
negative intensity caused an immediate decrease in purchase intentions, this is due to the
negativity effect. Further studies have found that a balanced review has little impact on
consumer behaviour and were assessed to be less useful than reviews providing a clearly
positive or negative opinion (Forman, Ghose, & Wiesenfeld, 2008)
2.4 CORPORATE INFLUENCE IN YOUTUBE
Sponsorship of UGC occurs where sponsorship may include payment of thousands of dollars
to a blogger in exchange for brand endorsements and publicity (Corcoran, 2010). According
to Bickart and Schindler (2001), online reviews are credible because consumers perceive the
opinions and accounts of personal product experiences to be from fellow consumers, who
have no vested interest in the product and no intentions to manipulate the reader.
The potential monetisation of vlogs can raise some issues regarding the two step flow
process. Carr and Hayes (2014) found that the two-step flow process is directly affected by
UP483845
21
representation of third-party influence, which has an impact on credibility, as well as WOM
influence.
2.4.1 Sponsored Content
Although it is necessary for a vlogger to disclose sponsored content, it is beneficial to do this
in a way that fits with the narrative of the blog (Kulmala, Mesiranta, & Tuominen, 2013).
The best sponsored content resembles organic content as closely as possible. However, some
topics tend to only be seen in either organic or sponsored messages. Competitions tend to
only emanate from an organisation’s need, while tips and advice messages emanate from the
need of the blogger and their audience (Kulmala, Mesiranta, & Tuominen, 2013). In organic
eWOM, tips and advice are seen to benefit both the blogger and the audience, however, with
sponsored content the blogger aids the reader by giving them tips (Kulmala, Mesiranta, &
Tuominen, 2013). Those sponsored messages that appear in the same format as organic posts
are the most effective, for example, if a blogger is given a piece of clothing that they
incorporate into their daily wardrobe (Corcoran, 2010). Bloggers need to find a balance
between audience needs (authenticity and trustworthiness) and marketer expectations (brand
magnifying) (Kretz & de Valck, 2010).
2.4.2 Blog Narrative
It is necessary to consider the suitability of the blogger for the marketing message to be
portrayed. Personal style is evident in both organic and sponsored content, where a blog
allows a form of digital self-presentation (Schau & Gilly, 2003). Therefore, sponsored
content should comply with the personal style and preferences of the blogger (Kulmala,
Mesiranta, & Tuominen, 2013). For example, it was found (Kulmala, Mesiranta, &
Tuominen, 2013) that fashion bloggers are more likely to incorporate products into an outfit
of the day post which fits with their personal style. Kozinets et al. (2010) highlight the
importance of character narrative in blogs, as the audience will give negative feedback to
sponsored posts if the content is not considered appropriate to the general style of the blog.
This is supported by attribution theory, whereby consistency of content increases
trustworthiness (Hu, Liu, & Zhang, 2008; Reichelt, Sievert, & Jacob, 2014; Zhang & Watts,
2008).
UP483845
22
2.4.3 Effect of Third-party Influence on Credibility
A bloggers’ decision to work with a third party is individualistic and highly considered
(Smith, 2010). Initially, companies used banner advertisements placed into blogs, however,
this has developed into advertisers seeking to directly influence reviewers’ content (Story,
2005; Walters, Natalie, & Timothy, 2010).
It has been found (Carr & Hayes, 2014) that a vlogger is seen to be the most credible when
third party influence is disclosed. While this provides a basic understanding as to the effect of
third party influence on credibility, it does not provide an in-depth understanding as to the
cues the audience uses to identify third party influence. Often, there are varying degrees of
explicitness regarding third-party influence. This is particularly useful to aid the marketer in
the decision to promote the product, either by a sponsored post, or whether to send a sample
of the product to the vlogger.
When third party influence is acknowledged there is likely to be a complementary
endorsement effect for a vlogger’s credibility, whereby the vlogger would be viewed as a
knowledgeable and specific source of information due to the assumption that a trusted
company views the vlogger in this way (Carr & Hayes, 2014).
2.5 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW
eWOM is an essential tool for facilitating information diffusion from opinion leaders to
opinion receivers (Sun et al., 2006). It is a powerful tool that allows influencers to utilise their
social networks and their credibility to provide more trusted information than marketer
generated content (Bickart & Schindler, 2001). It has previously been found that the source
(expertise, trustworthiness and attractiveness) (Ohanian, 1990; Ohanian, 1991) and their
motivation to share online; has a profound effect on the message effectiveness and that the
presence of parasocial relationships is likely to have a positive impact on brand attitude and
purchase intention (Greenwood, Pietromonaco, & Long, 2008). However, this has not yet
been explored with relation to YouTube and the power it has over the Millennial market. This
UP483845
23
research will focus on the Beauty and Personal Care Industry; where a high proportion (70%)
of social media users have viewed beauty content online (Mintel, 2015).
UP483845
24
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
The literature review concludes that eWOM is considered to be more trustworthy and
credible than marketer generated content (Bickart & Schindler, 2001; Kulmala, Mesiranta, &
Tuominen, 2013; Libai, et al., 2010).The review identified key areas that affect attitudes and
buying behaviour (Hu, Liu, & Zhang, 2008; Huang & Chen, 2006;), such as source
credibility (Hovland & Weiss, 1951; Ohanian, 1991) and characteristics (Forman, Ghose, &
Wiesenfeld, 2008), review valence (Chevalier & Mayzlin, 2006; Doh & Hwang, 2009; Lee,
Rodgers, & Kim, 2009) and the importance of the clarity of sponsored or organic information
(Corcoran, 2010; Carr & Hayes, 2014).
This research will aid marketers in their decision making process when deciding how best to
raise awareness of their product or brand using celebrity vloggers. It will identify whether
message effectiveness is increased if the information takes an organic or sponsored format
and whether the source has a direct impact on the effectiveness of the message.
The research has two main objectives:
• To explore how female Millennials respond to organic versus sponsored product
mentions on YouTube
• To explore the effect of parasocial relationships and the two-step process in
consumer attitudes and purchase behaviour.
The research questions which will be explored in this research are as follows:
1. How do female Millennials respond to organic versus sponsored mentions of a
product or brand?
2. If the viewers exhibit parasocial interactions, is there a greater effect on consumer
attitudes?
3. Does the source affect the two-step process and message effectiveness in beauty
videos?
UP483845
25
3.2 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY AND APPROACH
The research philosophy adopted contains “important assumptions about the way in which
you view the world” (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009, p. 108). Epistemology provides
ways of deciding what counts as knowledge, or doesn’t, therefore what does or does not
count as evidence (Jankowicz, 2005). This research will use an interpretivist epistemological
approach in that it will “prioritise people’s subjective interpretations and understanding of
social phenomena and their own actions” (Matthews & Ross, 2010, p. 28) and will then
develop theories from the data gathered. Therefore, some of the data that will be gathered
will relate to the literature explored (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 1997). The complexity of
opinions is lost if a positivist view is taken, and as the data is qualitative it will be difficult to
produce a statistical analysis. (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2012). The possible research
philosophies have been considered as laid out in Table 3 (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill,
2009, p. 119). Ontology is concerned with the nature of reality (Saunders, Lewis, &
Thornhill, 2012). Due to the nature of research collection whereby opinions are being
collected, a subjectivist approach is being taken (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2015), which
is that social phenomena are created from the perceptions and consequent actions of social
actors (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009).
The theory developed has used an inductive approach as the data collected has been used to
identify themes and patterns (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2015); and rather than testing for
a set hypothesis will use “particular facts and examples to form general rules and
principles” (Oxford Learner's Dictionaries, n.d.). A deductive approach will not be used as
the need to determine a cause-effect link would lead to a lack of understanding of the way in
which the social world was interpreted (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2015). Furthermore,
the research will use an exploratory strategy to obtain new insights into current situations,
rather than an explanatory strategy to explain a situation (Anderson, 2013). The research was
cross-sectional, providing a snapshot of the current situation, rather than providing
information that examines the changes over a period of time (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill,
2012).
UP483845
26
Table 3 - Overview of Research Philosophies (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009, p. 119)
Due to the exploratory nature of the research, semi-structured interviews, in the form of focus
groups have been used to gather the data.
3.3 SAMPLING
It was decided that a non-probability sampling technique would be used. Various techniques
were considered; convenience sampling, where cases are selected haphazardly because they
are easily available (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2015), was rejected as participants needed
a basic understanding of the topic in order to provide in-depth information. Purposive
sampling, where researchers choose participants deliberately to make the sample more
representative (Vogt, Gardner, & Haefelle, 2012), has been chosen as the appropriate method.
This is due to the focus being illustrative and the focus on selecting the sample is to be
particularly informative. As one subgroup is being selected, female Millennials, the sample
will be homogenous to each other, so that similarities and differences will be more apparent.
UP483845
27
The sample was made up of University of Portsmouth students. Various sample sizes were
taken into consideration; due to the nature of the data collection, semi-structured interviews,
it was decided that the sample would consist of 12-14 respondents. This was based upon
recommendations from Saunders et al. (2015, p. 297) as set out in the table below:
NATURE OF STUDY MINIMUM SAMPLE SIZE
SEMI-STRUCTURED/IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS 5-25 ETHNOGRAPHIC 35-36 GROUNDED THEORY 20-35 CONSIDERING A HOMOGENOUS POPULATION 4-12 CONSIDERING A HETEROGENOUS POPULATION 12-30
Table 4 - Minimum non-probability sample size. Adapted from (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2015, p. 297)
The sample’s suitability to the research objectives is clear, as the sample is only made up of
female Millennials, who are the target population.
3.4 RESEARCH STRATEGY
Interviews allow the researcher to build a rapport with the interviewee that can provide more
honest answers and allow the interviewer to probe for explanation and explore new avenues
opened by the interviewee responses (Bryman & Bell, 2003). In an exploratory study it is
appropriate to use interviews in order to collect in-depth data, especially to develop upon
grounded theory (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2015). In-depth interviews allow
participants to provide information based on their own personal experiences, this may bring
up issues the researcher was unable to anticipate.
This study collected data using two focus groups. Both focus groups followed the same
format, and there were between 6-8 respondents within each group. Pre-set questions were
asked by the interviewer to ensure the research questions were answered, but discussion was
encouraged amongst participants to gain a more in-depth understanding of information that
may be missed otherwise. The focus groups began by asking general questions regarding
influencers and their own viewing habits. Participants were then asked whether they would
use the product to be shown in the first video. A video was then shown where the contents of
the video are stated to be an advert within the title of the video using the word ‘ad’. Further
UP483845
28
questions were asked based upon purchase intentions, perceptions of the YouTuber and the
motivation to share the information. This process will then be repeated using a video where
the acknowledgment of paid advertising has been removed. While the questions were pre-
written, the narrative of the focus group may debviated the conversation away from the
questions, or lead to the questions being asked in a different manner.
3.5 LIMITATIONS OF STUDY
Although measures have been taken to minimize limitations to the study, such as carefully
planning focus groups and time frames, there are a few limitations to the study that could not
be avoided.
The use of convenience sampling means the data may be biased (Saunders, Lewis, &
Thornhill, 2015). Although in this case the sample has been carefully selected to match the
target population; the results may only be representative of those who partake in the focus
group, decreasing the validity. The use of focus groups could in itself bring up some
problems. The time taken for participants to be involved in the in-depth interview may make
it difficult to attract participants. Furthermore, there may be issues regarding the accuracy of
the data collection as results are subjective to the researcher.
As this was the researchers first experience of conducting a focus group; the limited amount
of knowledge may lead to cues being missed by the researcher. Furthermore, the lack of time
meant that only two focus groups could be conducted, ideally more would be completed with
the same participants to attempt to gain a deeper understanding of the phenomenon. It was
noted in the focus groups that participants sometimes gave short answers, or did not easily
enter into discussion, ideally the groups would spend more time together to avoid any
discomfort when speaking in the group.
UP483845
29
3.6 RESEARCH ETHICS
It is essential to consider the ethical issues that will arise from primary data collection.
According to Weathington et al. (2012, p. 24) ethics is the “process of studying moral
standards and examining how we should interpret and apply them in various situations”.
Key ethical issues that were addressed:
• Voluntary informed consent – all participants agreed to be part of the research and
were informed that they were able to withdraw from the study at any point.
• Recording – all participants approved the use of a recording device during the focus
groups and were made aware that the recording would be kept secure and once the
data was no longer needed it would be destroyed.
• Confidentiality – a numbering technique was used to allow data to be filed while
protecting respondents’ confidentiality.
• Knowledge – no deception was used in this study and participants were made aware
of the research objectives.
UP483845
30
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The aim of this research is to explore the effect that influencers on YouTube can have on
Millennial’s perceptions and purchase behavior. The research took the form of two focus
groups to gain a deeper understanding of the phenomenon than was present in the literature,
focusing on the beauty industry where these influencers are especially prominent (Mintel,
2015; Tesseras, 2014). The results have been categorised by research objectives; as well as
viewing habits, popularity effect, review valence and the effect on purchase behaviour. The
full transcript of the focus groups can be found in Appendix B.
To protect anonymity; participants will be referred to as their focus group and respondent
number, e.g. FG1R2 (focus group 1 respondent 2).
4.1 VIEWING HABITS
Participants had a range in length of time they spent watching beauty videos on YouTube,
this ranged from just over zero hours per week to roughly 4 hours. The research shows that
viewers tend to choose a video to watch, and then allow YouTube to automatically play
suggested videos. Four out of 12 participants directly acknowledged that they frequently log
onto YouTube with no clear idea of what they want to watch and let YouTube suggest video
options for them; this included utlising YouTube’s ‘Suggested Video’ function. “I don’t
always search for stuff… I watch what YouTube recommends to me” FG1R2. FG1R2 stated
that: “If YouTube automatically plays one that seems good I carry on watching” this was
echoed by FG2R5: “if it grabs my attention I carry on watching”. Therefore marketers need
to understand YouTube’s algorithms to ensure their products are seen by their target market.
Participants watch a range of video style including: monthly favourites, hauls and tutorials,
with tutorials being the most popular. One participant stated: “I like to be able to see what’s
in shops so I like hauls… Tutorials let me see how a product… actually works”. All
participants also follow vloggers across a variety of social media channels, most notably
Instagram and Snapchat. This suggests a wide reach that extends beyond the YouTube
UP483845
31
channel and across a variety of platforms. Campaigns may be more effective if they are
spread across the different types of media.
4.2 POPULARITY EFFECT
Research led to discussion on the quantity of reviews having an effect on the credibility of
the reviews. It has previously been found (Chen, Wu, & Yoon, 2004; Duan, Gu, & Whinston,
2008; Jalilvand & Samiei, 2012; Jeong & Koo, 2015) that the greater the number of reviews,
the more positive the influence on the viewer due to the availability of mitigating the risk.
However, this research found that an increase in reviews led to a dramatic decrease in trust
from respondents. FG1R3 stated that: “if a product is being really talked about I am more
cautious with what’s being said and tend to disregard it completely”. One product was
mentioned to have fallen into this category of ‘popping up’ and it was unanimously agreed
within the focus group that this product hadn’t been seen since it had a flurry of reviews and
the trust was lost in the product. FG1R2: “it was suddenly in every tutorial I watched and
I’ve never seen it used again so I’m glad I never bought it because these ‘experts’ clearly
aren’t using it”. Results showed that reviews discussing a product with a high number of
reviews are perceived to be an advert, regardless of whether or not they were named as such.
This led to a distrust with the message and decrease in effectiveness, in some cases, the video
or review would be completely ignored. This supported findings by Doh and Hwang (2009)
and Schindler and Bickart (2012). This noise of the number of reviews goes against the
previously found positive effect (Jalilvand & Samiei, 2012). This may be due to an audience
that is more aware of the presence of third-party influence across all media but this is
something that needs to be further explored.
4.3 REVIEW VALENCE
While it has previously been found that both positive (Lee, Rodgers, & Kim, 2009; Clemons,
Gao, & Hitt, 2006) and negative (Ballantine & Yeung, 2015; Chevalier & Mayzlin, 2006; Li
& Hitt, 2008) reviews have a greater influence on consumers, the results of this study were
ambiguous. FG2R2 stated that: “a positive review makes me want to buy a product without
any questions asked. I don’t look for… other reviews… but if it’s a negative review I scour
the internet… to see how accurate it is”. This supports findings that negative reviews can
UP483845
32
mitigate risk for consumers (Mims, 2011). Negativity bias was shown by some participants
FG2R1: “if there’s a bad review then it’s not a product I want to consider” showing that
even one negative review can cause a product or brand to be completely disregarded in some
consumer’s minds. However, the positivity bias was echoed by a number of participants,
suggesting that a positive review sticks with them and suggests that a product is something
they need to try.
It was highlighted in Focus Group 1 that reviews could stay with the viewers subconsciously.
FG1R3: “I don’t think I always realise that I remember [the positive review] though, I just
see something in the shop and think ‘I’ve heard good things about that’”. This shows the
importance of product mentions, but shows how important it is for mentions to be positive as
negative elements of the product could subconsciously stick with the consumer when making
a purchase decision. This subconscious recognition highlights the power of these influencers
and their eWOM.
4.4 EFFECT ON PURCHASE BEHAVIOUR
It was clear from answers given throughout both focus groups, as well as the body language
throughout, that participants’ purchase behaviour was affected by the opinion leaders they
watched. There was a range of understanding from respondents about how much their
behaviour was affected. Around half of the respondents were acutely aware of how much it
affected them, even when they were wise to the presence of a paid advert. This awareness
suggests that even though Millennials are highly educated in terms of paid advertising; it
does not always result in a negative effect and can still have an impact on purchase
behaviours. Watching videos had a positive effect on nearly all participants to encourage
spending, regardless of whether or not they needed the item they wanted. FG2R1: “it
definitely makes me spend money I don’t need to spend”; this type of spending could be due
to the lipstick effect (Investopedia, n.d.), however as this was not an expected result this
would need to be explored further.
UP483845
33
4.5 RESULTS CATEGORISED BY RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
4.5.1 How do female Millennials respond to organic versus sponsored mentions of a
product or brand?
After both organic and sponsored mentions all participants felt that they would purchase the
products mentioned. One participant acknowledged that they don’t question what is being
said when they are viewing at home, and that they assumed it must change their buying
habits.
Viewers were able to identify that the sponsored video was an advert immediately when they
saw the title of the video (“Winter Skincare Tips with #E45overnight! Ad” (Rhiannon
Ashlee, 2015)). There were mixed responses to the fact that she had received money for
mentioning the product. Some viewers were skeptical of the information: “I switch off a bit
when I know it’s an advert”. When one respondent reacted favourably to the advert another
highlighted that the information could be inaccurate. On the other hand, there was praise for
the style of the video: “She’s put in nice elements… that make it seem less like an advert. I
don’t think I would know it was one if it didn’t say”. One respondent further highlighted the
lack of trust in the information: “I don’t know if I would trust her, she gets paid to say stuff”.
This was not echoed by other members of the group.
After watching the organic mentions of a product participants were immediately more
trusting of the information. One respondent stated that: “the title didn’t say ad so I
immediately believe what she says more” and another added that they: “would trust this more
than the other one”, highlighting an increase of trust for the organic information.
Furthermore, two out of six participants highlighted that the information instantly seemed
more natural than the sponsored video, suggesting that this was directly due to the lack of the
word “ad” in the title of the video.
A complementary endorsement effect (Carr & Hayes, 2014) did not emerge from the
research, however, it was confirmed that the attributes of the brand must match those of the
product. FG2R2: “you can’t have a blogger with something random… it wouldn’t work” this
was backed up by FG2R3 who recognised that the vlogger was the face of the brand when
UP483845
34
they were discussing it and that “the brand… has to work together with the look of the video”
this builds upon the Meaning Transfer Model (McCracken, 1989) that suggests that the
attributes of the celebrity gets transferred to the product. FG2R3 furthers this to highlight that
it is also the representation of the video, and therefore the channel that will be projected onto
the product. Furthermore, it was found that the product should fit the natural narrative of the
vlogger’s channel (Kozinets et al., 2010; Kulmala, Mesiranta, & Tuominen, 2013). Results
demonstrated that when products seemed to appear within the vlogs naturally, participants
would act more favourably to the brand, but only if these were products they would expect
the vlogger to use. This means that brands must select influencers who naturally represent the
characteristics of the brand and who produce organic content that matches their brand.
4.5.2 If the viewers exhibit parasocial interactions, is there a greater effect on consumer
attitudes?
Parasocial relationships emulate social relationships and tend to exist where viewers think the
source has an attractive or desirable life (Greenwood, Pietromonaco, & Long, 2008). It was
clear throughout the focus groups that participants compared their life to that of the vlogger,
as well as exhibited similar characteristics in their relationship with the vlogger to their real
life relationships.
It is important to highlight that all participants echoed that this is lifestyle they would want to
emulate. This supports findings from Greenwood et al. (2008) signifying that women form
parasocial relationships with those who have a life they would like to emulate. This was the
main reason given for watching certain YouTubers. FG1R2 stated that she looks for
YouTubers where they are: “jealous of their life”. This means that an opinion leader will
have more influence if they have an attractive life to viewers, and therefore parasocial
interactions will have a greater impact on purchase intentions and brand perception.
Furthermore, these online relationships emulated viewers’ real-life relationships. Results
showed that participants in some instances the vlogger was fulfilling the role of absent
friends with regards to product recommendations. One participant suggested that they were
gullible to the information that was presented by vloggers, and another added that it is like
receiving recommendations from a best friend. This supports findings from Horton and Wohl
UP483845
35
(1956) and Schiappa et al. (2007); and confirms that parasocial relationships are present in
both traditional media and online media. This desire to be engaged in social interaction
(Hennig-Thurau et al., 2004) should be exploited by marketers who wish for their products to
be shown by the vlogger.
4.5.3 Does the source affect the two-step process and purchase intention in beauty
videos?
As suggested by Katz (1957), it was found that influencers are more effective if their viewers
and themselves are typically alike. This was highlighted in the findings, one participant
stressed heavily that she had stopped watching a vlogger due to the nature of her content
becoming irrelevant to the participant. FG1R5: “Not fitting for my age group… still listen…
but out of my price range now”. This was echoed by FG1R6: “I’ve stopped watching her…
she seems too young”. In fact, 4 out of 6 participants within focus group 1 mentioned that a
source with similar product purchases or style to themselves was a key factor in their choice of
vlogger. Furthermore, viewers typically only source information from sources similar to
themselves. This contrasts with Hagel and Armstrong’s (1997) findings that viewers are
searching for information from a diverse group of sources. However, it supports those findings
by Reichelt, Sievert, and Jacob (2014); and Shan and King (2015) that viewers are more likely
to seek, adopt and trust information from sources homophilious to themselves.
As suggested by Schiffman, Kanuk, & Hansen (2013), successful influencers should have
certain attributes including interest, knowledge and a similar age and social status. This was
reflected in the focus group results. It was clear from all participants that it was crucial for
vloggers to have a higher level of knowledge than themselves, although this was assessed
slightly differently by different participants. According to Feick & Price (1987), a maven is
given their power due to their social interaction, rather than their in-depth knowledge. From
the results it is clear that those influencers with the most effect are those where their social
interaction skills and attraction levels are higher. When asked what cues are used to assess
the opinion leader’s level of knowledge both groups were quick to acknowledge that they
relied on how attractive the video was, focussing on the makeup skill of the vlogger. This
means that brands must ensure they are working with vloggers who are attractive to their
target audience to ensure message effectiveness (Ohanian, 1990; Ohanian, 1991).
UP483845
36
Furthermore, it was acknowledged that the number of followers (bandwagon effects) could
give an understanding on the level of expertise, although this was discussed amongst
members of Focus Group 2 to be an inaccurate indication of expertise, this supports Lee and
Sundar (2012) who found that this should be combined with whether or not the source is an
expert. FG2R1 highlighted this: “There are makeup artists on YouTube that don’t have
millions of followers but they actually know the most.”. Therefore, those vloggers disclosing
identity descript information with a high number of followers will result in a higher level of
perceived expertise and trust (Lee & Sundar, 2012; Forman, Ghose, & Wiesenfeld, 2008;
Willemsen, Neijens, & Bronner, 2012).
UP483845
37
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
The primary research conducted within this dissertation was designed specifically to meet the
research objectives developed from the literature review that was conducted. These were:
• To explore how female Millennials respond to organic versus sponsored product
mentions on YouTube
• To explore the effect of parasocial relationships and the two-step process in
consumer attitudes and purchase behaviour.
The results were intended to add in-depth understanding to the phenomenon of celebrity
vloggers. It provided a focus on the details within the consumer viewpoint and the subjective,
motivating factors driving the consumer behaviour. The results of this study will provide an
understanding that will be crucial for marketing to the Millennial generation within the
beauty industry. It also provided some results that need to be explored further and due to
some limitations of the study, recommendations for future research have been provided.
5.2 CONCLUSION OF FINDINGS
While eWOM has long been thought to be more trusted than marketer-generated content, the
blurring line between sponsored and naturally occurring eWOM has led to a precarious
environment for brands to enter into. The results showed how much influence vloggers can
have over viewers’ attitudes and buying behaviour. There is a disparity in awareness levels;
where some consumers are extremely aware of the presence of monetisation in videos while
others don’t consider that this presence is there and assume eWOM is occurring with no
vested interest from the vlogger. This increase in noise for the consumer has made it more
difficult to assess the motivation for the influencer sharing the information. This has lead to
distrust in information, particularly when there are a large number of reviews as it is difficult
to assess the credibility of the review (Bickart & Schindler, 2001; Doh & Hwang, 2009).
Therefore, there can be a negative effect on consumer attitudes if a brand or product is being
UP483845
38
featured on multiple vloggers’ channels. However, these effects can be lessened if the source
has similar attributes to those of the brand. The eWOM content must fit the natural narrative
and style of the channel to be effective, regardless of whether it is organic or sponsored. This
is supported by McCracken’s Meaning Transfer Model (1989), whereby the attributes of the
vlogger get transferred to the product, but this will only work if those attributes are similar.
Additionally, attraction has a large impact on viewers’ perceptions of the brand. This
supports Ohanian’s 15-point source credibility scale (1991) and Horton and Wohl’s (1956)
parasocial interactions theory that attraction increases message effectiveness. Although, it has
previously been found that number of followers links to higher trustworthiness and content
credibility (Lee & Sundar, 2012); this was not replicated with the number of subscribers to
vloggers’ YouTube channels. Here it was found that number of followers was an inaccurate
representation of expertise and lack of expertise decreased message effectiveness.
The understanding of viewing habits has added a complexity that has not been found before.
As viewers were not always logging on with a specific video in mind there is an audience
waiting to be captured. Marketers should understand this Suggested Video feature so that
they are choosing influencers whose videos are suggested to their target audience.
Furthermore, it has highlighted how important tutorials are to female Millennials. This means
that it would be beneficial to send YouTubers samples in the hope that the product will end
up being shown. Understanding the motivation behind a vlogger to share this information
should increase the likelihood of a product being mentioned.
The stress from consumers on the social interactions being the most important part of the
viewing experience suggests that vloggers are market mavens (Doss & Carstens, 2014; Feick
& Price, 1987). They have a wide understanding of a market and the products within it, but
their power stems from their social communications, this means that the most influential
vloggers will not always be the most knowledgeable. However, vloggers will only be
influential to viewers if they are homophilious and have a similar style. When a message is
truly effective it will stick sub-conciously in consumers’ minds when they are purchasing
products, showing the power this eWOM can have on consumers’ attitudes and purchase
intentions.
UP483845
39
5.2.1. Managerial Implications
This research will aid marketers in their management of eWOM on YouTube in the Beauty
and Personal Care Industry. It highlights the importance of product mentions within videos;
but also provides an in-depth understanding of the social environment behind the
phenomenon. To have the most positive impact on purchase behaviour brands should partner
with influencers who are similar in style and lifestyle to their target audience. Due to
Millennial’s shrewd understanding of the presence of advertising in eWOM marketers must
encourage the vlogger to incorporate the message into their style of video. They must also
stick to the ASA rules (Making ads clear: The challenge for advertisers and vloggers, 2014)
as Millennials question motives when a product mention looks like an advert but is not
disclosed as such.
This research shows that regardless of whether a product is sponsored or mentioned
organically, a review will subconsciously stay with a consumer. Therefore, it is essential to
be present in the mind of the vlogger. Due to the complicated, interpretivist nature of eWOM,
brands must decide if it is more appropriate to maintain control of their message and pay the
high costs for an advert; or whether sending the vlogger samples and trusting that they will be
mentioned; will provide a higher return on investment.
5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
The exploratory nature of this research led to some unforeseen findings; it is recommended
that further research into these findings in order to further understand this phenomenon from
the consumers’ viewpoint. Further research should be conducted on the reasons for popularity
of reviews causing a decrease in trust. It has been speculated here that this is due to the noise
this produces but this should be explored further. Additionally, it was not expected for results
to echo the lipstick effect (Investopedia, n.d.); however, this was not identified as a cause and
effect so this should be studied further with influencer marketing. Furthermore, the study
only provides a snapshot at the current moment in time; future research should be conducted
over a period of time to gain a richer understanding of the social phenomenon.
UP483845
40
BIBLIOGRAPHY Aldridge, A. (2015, May 29). Five tips for successful vlogger marketing. Retrieved April 1,
2016, from Campaign: http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/five-tips-successful-vlogger-marketing/1349178
Alexander, R. S. (1964). Marketing Definitions. Chicago: American Marketing Association. Alon, A. T., Brunel, F. F., & Schneier Siegal, W. L. (2005). Ritual behaviour and community
change: exploring the social-psychological roles of net rituals in the developmental processes of online consumption communities. Online Consumer Psychology, 7-33.
Ambler, T. (1992). Need-to-know Marketing: An Accessible A to Z Guide. London: Century Business.
Anderson, V. (2013). Research Methods in Human Resource Management (3rd Edition ed.). London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
Arndt, J. (1967). The Role of Product-Related Conversations in the Diffusion of a New Product. Journal of Market Research, 4(3), 291-295.
Ballantine, P., & Yeung, C. A. (2015). The effects of review valence in organic versus sponsored blog sites on perceived credibility, brand attitude, and behavioural intentions. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 33(4), 508-521.
BBC. (2014, November 26). Vloggers paid for promotions 'need clearer labelling'. Retrieved April 1, 2016, from BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30203816
Bickart, B., & Schindler, R. M. (2001). Internet Forums as Influential Sources of Consumer Information. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 15(3), 31-40.
Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W., & Engel, J. F. (2006). Consumer Behavior (10th Edition ed.). Mason, Ohio: International Thomson Publishing.
Bone, P. F. (1995). Word-of-Mouth Effects on Short-Term and Long-Term Product Judgement. Journal of Business Research, 32(3), 213-223.
Buttle, F. A. (1998). Word of mouth: understanding and managing referral marketing. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 6(3), 241-254.
Carr, C. T., & Hayes, R. A. (2014). The Effect of Disclosure of Third-Party Influence of an Opinion Leader's Credibility and Electronic Word of Mouth in Two Step Flow. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 14(1), 38-50.
Chan, K. K., & Misra, S. (1990). Characteristics of the Opinion Leader: A New Dimension. Journal of Advertising, 19(3).
Charbonneau, J., & Garland, R. (2010). Products effects on endorser image. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing, 22(1), 101-110.
Chaterjee, P. (2001). Online reviews: Do consumers use them? Advances in Consumer Research, 28(1), 129-134.
Chawla, D. (2014, September 28). The young vloggers and their fans who are changing the face of youth culture. Retrieved April 1, 2016, from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/sep/28/vloggers-changing-future-advertising
Chen, P. Y., Wu, S. Y., & Yoon, J. (2004). The impact of online recommendations and consumer feedback on sales. ICIS 2004 Proceedings, 711-724.
Cheung, C. M., & Lee, M. K. (2012). What drives consumers to spread electronic word of mouth in online consumer-opinion platforms. Decision Support Systems, 53, 218-225.
Cheung, M. Y., Luo, C., Sia, C. L., & Chen, H. (2009). Credibility of electronic word of mouth: informational and normative determinants of on-line consumer recommendations. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 13(4), 9-38.
Chevalier, J., & Mayzlin, D. (2006). The effect of word of mouth on sales: online book reviews. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(3), 345-354.
UP483845
41
Chu, S. C., & Kamal, S. (2008). The Effect of Perceived Blogger Credibility and Argument Quality on Message Elaboration and Brand Attitudes. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 8(2), 26-37.
Chu, S.-C., & Sung, Y. (2015). Using a consumer socialization framework to understand electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) group membership among brand followers on Twitter. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 14, 251-260.
Clemons, E., Gao, G., & Hitt, L. (2006). When online reviews meet hyper-differentiation: a study of the craft beer industry. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(2), 149-171.
Corcoran, C. (2010, August 27). Marketing's new rage: brands sponsoring influential bloggers. Retrieved January 24, 2016, from WWD: http://wwd.com/business-news/advertising/marketings-new-rage-brands-sponsor-influential-bloggers-3230386/
Degun, G. (2015, March 11). ASA calls clearer guidelines between vloggers and brands. Retrieved March 1, 2016, from Campaign Live: http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/asa-calls-clearer-guidelines-vloggers-brands/1337684
Doh, S.-J., & Hwang, J.-S. (2009). How consumers evaluate eWOM (Electronic Word-of-Mouth) messages. Cyber Psychology and Behaviour, 12(2), 193-197.
Donnelly, C., & Scaff, R. (2016). Who are the Millennial shoppers? And what do they really want. Accenture.
Dorsey, J. (n.d.). The Top 10 Millennials & Gen Y Questions Answered. Retrieved from Jason Dorsey: http://jasondorsey.com/millennials/the-top-gen-y-questions-answered/
Doss, S. K., & Carstens, D. S. (2014). Big Five Personality Traits and Brand Evangelism. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 6(3), 13-22.
Duan, W., Gu, B., & Whinston, A. B. (2008). Do online reviews matter? An empirical investigation of panel data. Decision Support Systems, 45(4), 1007-1016.
Eastman, J. K., Iyer, R., Liao-Troth, S., Williams, D. F., & Griffin, M. (2014). The Role of Involvement on Millennials' Mobile Technology Behaviors: The Moderating Impact of Status Consumption, Innovation, and Opinion Leadership. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 22(4), 455-470.
Edwards, S. (2015, October 13). Infographic: How beauty vloggers hold the key to successful Christmas marketing Read more: http://wallblog.co.uk/2015/10/13/infographic-how-beauty-vloggers-hold-the-key-to-successful-christmas-marketing/#ixzz453MLgjiR Follow us: @brandrepublic on Twitter. Retrieved April 1, 2016, from Wallblog: http://wallblog.co.uk/2015/10/13/infographic-how-beauty-vloggers-hold-the-key-to-successful-christmas-marketing/
Erdogan, B. Z. (1999). Celebrity Endorsement: A Literature Review. Journal of Marketing Management, 15(4), 291-314.
Feick, L. F., & Price, L. L. (1987). The Market Maven: A Diffuser of Marketplace Information. Journal of Marketing, 51(1), 83-97.
Feloni, R. (2014, Jan 12). 7 Unhealthy Brands Endorsed by Athletes. Retrieved May 16, 2016, from Business Insider: http://www.businessinsider.com/7-unhealthy-brands-endorsed-by-athletes-2014-1?op=1&IR=T
Floh, A., Koller, M., & Zauner, A. (2013). Taking a deeper look at online reviews: the asymmetric effect of valence intensity on shopping behaviour. Journal of Marketing Management, 29(5-6), 646-670.
Forman, C., Ghose, A., & Wiesenfeld, B. (2008). Examining the relationship between reviews and sales: the role of reviewer identity disclosure in electronic markets. Information Systems Research, 19(3), 291-313.
UP483845
42
Gleam Futures. (n.d.). Retrieved May 29, 2016, from Gleam Futures: http://www.gleamfutures.com/
Greenwood, D. N., Pietromonaco, P. R., & Long, C. R. (2008). Young Women's Attachment Style and Interpersonal Engagement with Female TV Stars. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25, 287-407.
Hagel, J., & Armstrong, A. G. (1997). Net Gain: Expanding Markets through Virtual Communities. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004). Electronic Word-of-Mouth via Consumer-Opinion Platforms: What Motivates Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the Internet. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38-52.
Hong, S., & Park, H. S. (2012). Computer-mediated persuasion in online reviews: statistical versus narrative evidence. Computers in Human Behaviour, 28(3), 906-919.
Horton, D., & Wohl, R. (1956). Mass Communication and Para-social Interaction: Observations on Intimacy at a Distance. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215-229.
Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951). The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15(4), 635-650.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. I., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion; psychological studies of opinion change. Communication and persuasion; psychological studies of opinion change., 12.
Hu, N., Liu, L., & Zhang, J. J. (2008). Do online reviews affect product sales? The role of reviewer characteristics and temporal effects. Information Technology and Management, 9(3), 201-214.
Huang, J. H., & Chen, Y. F. (2006). Herding in online product choice. Psychology and Marketing, 23(5), 413-428.
Investopedia. (n.d.). Lipstick Effect. Retrieved May 16, 2016, from Investopedia: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/lipstick-effect.asp
Investopedia. (n.d.). Millenials. Retrieved from Investopedia: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/millennial.asp
Jalilvand, M. R., & Samiei, N. (2012). The effect of electronic word of mouth on brand image and purchase intention: an empirical study in the automobile industry in Iran. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 30(4), 460-476.
Jankowicz, A. D. (2005). Business Research Projects. Luton, UK: Cengage Learning. Jeong, H.-J., & Koo, D.-M. (2015). Combined effects of valence and attributes or e-WOM on
consumer judgment for message and product. Internet Research, 25(1), 1066-2243. Johnson, G. J., Kumar, A., & Bruner Il, G. C. (2006). Interactivity and its facets revisited.
Journal of Advertising, 35(4), 35-52. Katz, E. (1957). The Two-Step Flow of Communication: An Up To-Date Report on an
Hypothesis. People's Opinion Quarterly, 21(1), 61-78. Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal influence : the part played by people in the
flow of mass communications. London. Kim, A. J., & Johnson, K. K. (2016). Power of consumers using social media: Examining the
influences of brand-related user-generated content on Facebook. Computers in Human Behaviour, 58, 98-108.
Kozinets, R. V., de Valck, K., Wojnicki, A. C., & Wilner, S. J. (2010). Networked narratives: Understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities. Journal of Marketing, 74(2), 71-89.
Kretz, G., & de Valck, K. (2010). Pixelize me!: digital storytelling and the creation of archetypal myths through explicit and implicit self-brand assocation in fashion and luxury blogs . Research in Consumer Behaviour, 313-29.
UP483845
43
Kulmala, M., Mesiranta, N., & Tuominen, P. (2013). Organic and amplified ewom in consumer fashion blogs. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 17(1), 20-37.
Lange-Faria, W., & Elliot, S. (2012). Understanding the role of social media in destination marketing. Tourismos, 7(1), 193-211.
Langley, S. (2014, October 27). Influencer Marketing 3.0. Retrieved April 1, 2016, from Marketing Week: https://marketingweek.org/2014/10/27/influencer-marketing-3-0/
Lau, G. T., & Ng, S. (2001). Individual and Situational Factors Influencing Negative Word-of-Mouth Behaviour. Canadian Journal of Administrative Science, 18(3), 163-178.
Lee, J., & Sundar, S. (2012). To tweet or retweet? That is the question for health professionals on Twitter. Health Communication, 28(5), 509-524.
Lee, J., Park, D., & Han, I. (2008). The effect of negative online consumer reviews on product attitude: an information processing view. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 7(3), 341-352.
Lee, K., & Koo, D. (2012). Effects of attribute and valence of e-WOM on message adoption: moderating roles of subjective knowledge and regulatory focus. Computers in Human Behaviour, 28(5), 1974-1984.
Lee, M. K., Cheung, C. M., Lim, K. H., & Sia, C. L. (2006). Understanding Customer Knowledge Sharing in Web-based Discussion Boards: An Exploratory Study. Internet Research, 16(3), 289-303.
Lee, M., & Youn, S. (2009). Electronic word of mouth: how eWOM platforms influence consumer product judgement. International Journal of Advertising, 28(3), 473-499.
Lee, M., Rodgers, S., & Kim, M. (2009). Effects of valence and extremity of eWOM on attitude toward the brand and website. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 31(2), 1-11.
Levy, S. J., & Rook, D. W. (1999). Brands, Consumers, Symbols and Research. SAGE Publications.
Li, X., & Hitt, L. (2008). Self-selection and information role of online product reviews. Information Systems Research, 19(4), 456-474.
Libai, B., Bolton, R., Bügel, M., de Ruyter, K., Götz, O., Risselada, H., & Stephen, A. (2010). Customer-to-customer interactions: broadening the scope of word of mouth research. Jourmal of Service Research, 13(3), 267-282.
Lis, B. (2013). In eWOM we trust. Business and Information Systems Engineering, 5(3), 129-140.
Making ads clear: The challenge for advertisers and vloggers. (2014, November 26). Retrieved May 29, 2016, from ASA: https://www.asa.org.uk/News-resources/Media-Centre/2014/Making-ads-Clear-The-challenge-for-advertisers-and-vloggers.aspx#.V01uz_kguUk
Matthews, B., & Ross, L. (2010). Research Methods: A Practical Guide for the Social Sciences. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.
McCarthy, J., Rowley, J., Ashworth, C. J., & Pioch, E. (2014). Managing brand presence through social media: the case of UK football clubs. Journal of Internet Research, 24(2), 181-204.
McCracken, G. (1989). Who is the Celebrity Endorser? Cultural Foundations of the Endorsement Process. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(3), 310-321.
Michelle Phan. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2016, from YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/MichellePhan
Mims, C. (2011, September 20). How negative reviews increase sales online. Retrieved from Technology Review: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/425488/how-negative-reviews-increase-sales-online/
UP483845
44
Mintel. (2015). Social Media: BPC - UK - June 2015. Mintel. Mir, I. A., & Rehman, K. U. (2013). Factors Affecting Consumer Attitudes and Intentions
Towards User-Generated Product Content on YouTube. Management & Marketing Challenges for the Knowledge Society, 8(4), 637-654.
Norum, P. S. (2003). Examination of Generational Differences in Household Apparel Expenditures. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 32(1), 52-75.
Oakes, O. (2015, August 19). New rules for vloggers outlined by ads regulator. Retrieved March 4, 2016, from Marketing Magazine: http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/article/new-rules-vloggers-outlined-ads-regulator/1360611
Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39-52.
Ohanian, R. (1991). The impact of celebrity spokepersons' perceived image on consumers' intention to purchase. Journal of Advertising Research, 13(1), 46-55.
Oxford Learner's Dictionaries. (n.d.). Inductive. Retrieved March 21, 2016, from Oxford Learner's Dictionaries: http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/inductive
Park, D., & Kim, S. (2008). The effects of consumer knowledge on message processing of electronic word-of-mouth via online consumer reviews. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 7(1), 399-410.
Pixi2woo. (n.d.). Pixi2woo. Retrieved April 1, 2016, from Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/user/pixi2woo
Reichelt, J., Sievert, J., & Jacob, F. (2014). How credibility affects eWOM reading: The influences of expertise, trustworthiness, and similarity on utalitarian and social functions. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20, 65-81.
Rhiannon Ashlee. (2015, March 9). Winter Skincare Tips with #E45overnight! ad | Rhiannon Ashlee. Retrieved March 28, 2016, from YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hWkOTXsvtg
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th Edition ed.). London: Simon & Schuster. Rossiter, J. R., & Percy, L. (1985, January 1). Advertising Communications Models.
Advances In Consumer Research, 12(1), 510-524. Ryu, G., & Feick, L. (2007). A penny for your thoughts: referral reward programmes and
referral likelihood. Journal of Marketing, 71(1), 84-94. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (1997). Research Methods for Business Students.
London: Pitman Publishing. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students (5th
Edition ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for Business Students
(6th Edition ed.). Harlow, England: Pearson Education Ltd. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2015). Research Methods for Business Students.
Pearson Education Limited. Schau, H. J., & Gilly, M. C. (2003). We are what we post? Self presentation in personal web
space. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 385-404. Schiappa, E., Allen, M., & Gregg, P. (2007). Parasocial relationships and television: a meta
analysis of the effects. Mass Media Effects: Advances through Meta-Analysis, 301-314.
Schiffman, L. G., Kanuk, L., & Hansen, H. (2013). Consumer Behaviour. (2nd Edition). Financial Times/Prentice Hall.
UP483845
45
Schindler, R. M., & Bickart, B. (2012). Perceived helpfulness of online consumer reviews: the role of message content and style. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 11(3), 234-243.
Shan, Y., & King, K. (2015). The credibility of online product reviews: How much do consumers trust them? American Academy of Advertising Conference Proceedings, 141-151.
Smith, B. G. (2010). The Evolution of the Blogger: Blogger Considerations of Public Relations - Sponsored Content in the Blogosphere. Public Relations Review, 36(2).
Steffes, E. M., & Burgee, L. E. (2009). Social ties and online word of mouth. Journal of Internet Research, 19(1), 42-59.
Story, L. (2005, November 26). As Corporate Ad Money Flows Their Way, Bloggers Risk Their Rebel Reputation. New York Times.
Sun, T., Youn, S., Wu, G., & Kuntaraporn, M. (2006). Online Word-of-Mouth (or Mouse):An Exploration of Its Antecedentsand Consequences. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 1104-1127.
Tesseras, L. (2014, August 19). Meet the New Generation of Online Celebrities. Retrieved March 5, 2016, from Marketing Week: http://www.marketingweek.com/2014/08/19/meet-the-new-generation-of-online-celebrities/
Trott, P. (2012). Innovation Management and New Product Development (5th Edition ed.). Harlow, Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited.
Vogt, W. P., Gardner, D. C., & Haefelle, L. M. (2012). When to Use What Research Design. The Guildford Press.
Walters, R. D., Natalie, T. T., & Timothy, S. M. (2010). Media Catching and the Journalist -Public Relations Practitioner Relationship: How Social Media are Changing the Practice of Media Relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 22(3).
Wang, S., Cunningham, N. R., & Eastin, M. S. (2015). The impact of eWOM message characteristics on the perceived effectiveness of online consumer reviews. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 15(2), 151-159.
Weathington, B. L., Cunnigham, C. J., & Pittenger, D. J. (2012). Understanding Business Research. Wiley.
Willemsen, L., Neijens, P., & Bronner, F. (2012). The ironic effect of source identification on the perceived credibility of online product reviewers. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(1), 16-31.
Wiseman, E. (2014, July 20). Lights, camera, lipstick: beauty vloggers are changing the face of the make-up industry. Retrieved March 10, 2016, from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2014/jul/20/beauty-bloggers-changing-makeup-industry
Wong, K. (2014, September 10). The Explosive Growth Of Influencer Marketing And What It Means For You. Retrieved April 1, 2016, from Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kylewong/2014/09/10/the-explosive-growth-of-influencer-marketing-and-what-it-means-for-you/#2ebe1ef3595f
Wood, L. (2000). Brands and brand equity: definition and management. Management Decision, 38(9), 662-669.
Yoo, C. W., Kim, Y. J., & Sanders, G. L. (2015). The impact of interactivity of electronic word of mouth systems and E-Quality on decision support in the context of the e-marketplace. Information & Management, 52, 496-505.
Zhang, W., & Watts, S. A. (2008). Capitalizing on content: information adoption in two online communities. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 9(2), 73-94.
UP483845
46
Zoella. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2016, from YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/zoella280390
UP483845
47
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 – Focus Group Questions
1. How many hours do you spend watching beauty videos per week?
2. What type of beauty videos do you tend to watch?
3. Would you say it affects your purchase behaviour?
4. Do you think you are able to judge whether a product is being advertised because the
vlogger has been paid or they are just discussing their own experiences?
5. In your own personal experience, do you tend to trust the opinions expressed by a
vlogger?
6. Are you aware of …. Do you have any feelings towards ….? Would you use the
product/service?
Show participants video 1
1. So, now how do you feel about the brand? Would you use the product/service?
2. How do you perceive the YouTuber?
3. Why do you think they are sharing this information with you?
4. Would you say they are knowledgeable in their field?
5. Would you trust the YouTuber in their recommendations?
1. Are you aware of …. Do you have any feelings towards ….? Would you use the
product/service?
Show participants video 2
1. So, now how do you feel about the brand? Would you use the product/service?
2. How do you perceive the YouTuber?
3. Why do you think they are sharing this information with you?
4. Would you say they are knowledgeable in their field?
5. Would you trust the YouTuber in their recommendations?
UP483845
48
Appendix 2 – Focus Group Results
Focus Group One Results
To protect participants’ sensitive information, all names have been replaced with respondent.
Interviewer: Hi everyone, thank you for coming here today. I’ll just give you a brief
overview of what we are doing. You are all here because you previously confirmed that you
watch beauty videos on YouTube. I’m going to ask you a few questions regarding viewing
habits and then show you a couple of videos and ask some more questions after the videos
have been shown. While I will be asking some questions, please feel free to speak freely and
in as much detail as possible.
Interviewer: How many hours roughly do you spend watching beauty videos per week?
Respondent 1: Probably about 2
Respondent 2: It tends to be fairly spread out, I normally watch them like one at a
time, although if YouTube automatically plays one that seems good I carry on
watching. So maybe like 4 hours?
Respondent 3: Yeah, I would agree that tends to be how it happens for me too.
Although I probably spend a bit less time watching them, so roughly 2 I guess.
Respondent 4: I don’t actually watch them that often, just when I want a tutorial so I
probably watch one every couple of weeks for a special night out.
Respondent 5: 4 hours is a lot, I’m going to say maybe like half an hour a week.
Respondent 6: I’m similar to R2, I will let YouTube play and do its own thing, when
I’m doing uni work, I don’t know how to estimate the number of hours. I’ll say about
3.
Interviewer: Ok, excellent, what type of videos do you tend to watch?
R4: I just watch tutorials really, for new make up ideas.
R5: Oh yeah, I like make up tutorials, I watch whatever Zoella puts up that involves
products, I ignore a lot of what she does though.
Interviewer: Oh, why’s that?
UP483845
49
R5: It’s not really fitting for my age group I don’t think. I liked her when she had less
subscribers and it was mainly a beauty channel, but now it’s stupid videos with other
YouTubers that are just stupid challenges and stuff. I still listen to what she says
about products but actually a lot of it is out of my price range now.
R6: Yeah I’m not a fan of her anymore, I’ve stopped watching her.
Interviewer: Why?
R6: Same reasons. She seems too young.
Interviewer: Okay, who do you like to watch?
R6: I like Lily Melrose, Michelle Phan … Fleur, but I can’t remember her YouTube
name
Interviewer: How about the rest of you?
R5: Yeah, Fleur De La Force I think she is. She’s okay, she’s a bit dull.
R1: I watch most stuff Becca Rose does, she’s entertaining and uses products I
would.
R3: Tanya Burr is alright, I like Becca Rose as well. She makes me laugh
R2: I watch a lot of Lily Melrose, she has the same sort of style as me
R4: I don’t watch anyone specific, I don’t know who a lot of these people are. I
literally just search for a make up tutorial and when I see one I like the look of I click
on it.
[general murmuring of agreement]
Interviewer: So the rest of you do that too?
R1, R2, R3, R5, R6: Yeah
R2: I don’t always search for stuff though, I watch what YouTube recommends to me
[general murmuring of agreement]
Interviewer: I want to dig a little bit deeper into why you enjoy watching the YouTubers
that you do… Can you expand on this any more?
R2: I look for people that have the same style I do, or ones where I’m jealous of their
life. [laughs]
R1: Yeah I like seeing what my life would be like if I spent my life showing random
people make up recommendations. [laughs]. Why did I never do that?
R4: I know right. They just seem like me so surely I could make loads of money like
that
UP483845
50
R5: You can dream
[general laughter]
R3: I agree that I look for people that have a similar style or look to me. Or who make
me laugh and are just generally engaging. I don’t want a boring person telling me
about a boring product. No thank you
Interviewer: Okay, so to go back to what type of videos you tend to watch…
R2: A mix of stuff: hauls, monthly favourites…
R6: Yeah, I like to be able to see what’s in shops so I like hauls as well. Tutorials let
me see how a product or a brush or whatever actually works and I like being able to
gain an opinion before I buy something.
R2: Oh yeah, that’s why I like favourite videos.
Interviewer: Do you think these videos affect your purchase behaviour?
R1: Oh, definitely. I buy loads of stuff I really don’t need.
[general laughter]
R2: Me too
[general laughter/agreement]
R1: Stuff always looks better on the screen than it does once I have it. So then I get
the product and then watch a video where someone is raving about a different
mascara and then I’m like, I need that mascara in my life.
R2: I do that with eyeshadows
Interviewer: Why do you think that is?
R2: Because I’m gullible
[general laughter]
R2: And I trust what they’re telling me.
R1: I feel like they know what they’re talking about and if they say a mascara is good
then it must be.
Interviewer: What about the rest of you?
R6: R1 basically summed it up. My best friend always shares her make up with me
but she’s on placement this year and so now it’s where I get my recommendations
from… I don’t ever trust what the packaging says. I had enough terrible make up
choices at school
[general laughter/agreement]
UP483845
51
R6: I don’t need it at uni too.
R3: I always wonder whether they are being paid to say stuff. I don’t like that they
get sent free products but if I trust their opinion I have to spend my own money to do
it. They can try as many new products as they want.
R6: Are you jealous?
R3: Obviously
R4: I can make my own judgement in a tutorial. I get to see it being used so I can
make my own call on if it looks decent.
R3: Yeah, but if it’s like a Boots haul and they’re just showing me an endless list of
products they’ve apparently just “bought”…
Interviewer: That takes me on nicely to my next question, do you think you are able to tell
when a product is being shown because the vlogger is being paid to show it?
R3: I like to think they would tell me, but I just always assume that it is advertising
R6: It can’t all be advertising. I’ve seen videos where they say they’ve been given a
product for free or money to spend with them. Topshop and New Look I see giving
people money and then there’s a competition to win a gift card or something like that.
R4: I don’t think I would ever know if I was watching an advert
R1: They get money for everything they say and I know that but I still believe that the
next mascara will always be the best one I’ll ever use.
[general laughter/agreement]
R2: I cannot tell when there’s an advert, no.
R5: Me either.
Interviewer: Typically, do you think you respond differently to products that are clearly an
advert versus those where it isn’t clear, and if so why do you think that is?
R1: I think I probably do respond differently. If it’s an advert I think I lose a little bit
of trust in what’s being said, because typically these channels have been started where
everything hasn’t been paid for. So they a product is there because it has to be… but
then I think that everything is being paid to be there, doesn’t it cost a brand thousands
to be on a channel with a lot of subscribers? Sorry, that was a bit of a ramble [laughs]
I prefer it when there isn’t the placement of an obvious advert.
R3: I don’t think I do, in that I don’t always think people are transparent about
payment, especially some stuff that you suddenly see pop up all over social media,
UP483845
52
like the tooth whitening and protein products. They just came out of nowhere but
were on everyone’s Instagram. So if a product is being really talked about I am more
cautious with what’s being said and tend to disregard it completely.
R2: I agree with that. I don’t think I’m very good at working out what I am looking at
but when BooTea is all over the Kardashian’s Insta I can’t help but assume they have
been paid to have it there and sometimes you hear horror stories about products like
that and I don’t trust it at all.
Interviewer: Okay, that’s interesting, but to pull it back to the beauty industry, do
you make that same link here?
R2: I guess, yeah, sometimes products suddenly surface, like this banana face powder
that popped up a while ago.. It was really expensive and suddenly it was in every
tutorial I watched and I’ve never seen it used again so I’m glad I never bought it
because these ‘experts’ clearly aren’t using it.
Interviewer: So would the number of reviews change how you feel about a product
or brand?
R2: Yes, it looks like one big advert.
Interviewer: So if a product looks like it’s being discussed naturally, without
payment, do you think it makes you feel more positively, negatively, or about the
same towards a brand?
R1: Positively
R2: Same
R3: Positively
R4: Positively
R5: Positively
R6: Positively
Interviewer: Do you think that whether the review is positive, negative or neutral has any
effect on how you feel about the product?
R2: If I see a negative review I normally avoid a product but a positive review sticks
in my mind as something I should probably try.
R3: Agreed, I don’t think I always realise that I remember it though, I just see
something in the shop and think “I’ve heard good things about that”
Interviewer: Does anyone else find that they subconsciously pick up reviews?
R1, R2, R4, R5, R6: Yes
UP483845
53
Interviewer: So what about a neutral review?
R4: I don’t think I have ever seen one?
R3: Me either
[all shaking heads]
Interviewer: Do you think the credibility of the reviewer is important to you?
R2: What do you mean by credibility?
Interviewer: A combination of trust and expertise
R2: Yes, definitely, if I don’t think they are being truthful I won’t watch them. I don’t
think they would have many followers either to be honest.
R1: No they wouldn’t have many but I think that anything I watch has someone
credible.
R2: Yes, everything that I watch is credible as well but I would say that it is really
important to me.
R3: Me too
R4: Yeah credibility is very important.
R5: It’s not something I’ve considered but I’m the same in that if something isn’t
believable then I won’t watch it.
R6: Same
Interviewer: How do you assess the level of expertise of the vlogger?
R6: By how good their make-up and hair is [laughs]
[general laughter]
R6: That’s not a joke
R2: [laughs] I know it’s not cause it’s the same for me.
[general murmurs of agreement]
Interviewer: So do you all agree with that?
R1, R3, R4, R5: Yes
Interviewer: Are there any other clues you tend to use to determine expertise?
R1: If a brand I know works with them I think it helps. Like if they are a
spokesperson for a brand.
R2: That’s a good one. And if they are anything else on the side like obviously
anyone who is also a make up artist is an expert.
UP483845
54
R4: That’s probably it, if they’re technically an expert and they’re pretty then that’s
all I would know [laughs] it might just be someone bullsh****ng that they know
stuff and I would have no clue because they have a candle and fairy lights and clear
skin. [laughs]
Interviewer: Does anyone have anything else to add?
R6: [laughs] I think they pretty much covered it all.
Interviewer: So if a brand chooses to work with a vlogger do you think it’s important for the
attributes of the brand to match with the attributes of the vlogger?
R2: They do have to go together well. Like I wouldn’t want to see Jamie Oliver
telling me what mascara I should use [laughs].
[general laughter]
R4: What an odd pairing [laughs] but what she’s saying is correct, sort of [laughs]
R2: That was a bad example [laughs] but if someone has said they don’t like… I
don’t know… lipstick then it doesn’t make sense to see them saying a lipstick is great.
Interviewer: Okay but what about the attributes of the brand and the vlogger going
together?
R1: Do you mean if someone is kind is fun and cheerful and is then pushing a really
upmarket brand?
Interviewer: Yep, that’s it.
R1: Yeah I hate when that happens. Zoella does that all the time and it just doesn’t
work with how she comes across.
R2: Oh wait so what was the original question?
Interviewer: Do you think it’s important for the attributes of the brand to match with
the attributes of the vlogger?
R2: Oh, yes.
R1, R3, R4, R5, R6: Yes
Interviewer: Alright, so do you any of you know FashionRocksMySocks?
R1, R4, R5, R6: Yes
R2: Don’t think so
R4: No idea what any of their names are [laughter]
Interviewer: [laughter] Okay, are you aware of the brand E45?
UP483845
55
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6: Yeah
Interviewer: Would you use their products?
R3: I already do
R2: Yeah, I would
R5: I’ve never used it, I’m not entirely sure what it’s for
R6: Me either, never used it
R3: Oh, you should, it’s great for really dry skin
Interviewer: Okay, I’m going to show you a short clip now and then ask you a few
questions.
[Shows participants video 1]
Interviewer: Okay, so now I’ll ask again, would you use e45?
[Nodding from all participants]
Interviewer: Just to be clear, is that a yes?
R1, R2, R3, R4, R6: Yes
R5: Probably, yeah
Interviewer: Why?
R5: She made quite a good case for it actually. I always kind of assumed it was for
eczema but now I think it can be used for any winter dry skin.
R6: I agree; I like that she spoke about how it affected her
R3: She’s clearly paid to say that though
R5: Oh yeah true. Oh now I don’t know
R3: She’s right that it’s good stuff but I switch off a bit when I know it’s an advert.
R4: She put in nice elements though that make it seem less like an advert. I don’t
think I would know it was one if it didn’t say.
Interviewer: How do you perceive the YouTuber?
R6: She seems nice, I would trust her
R5: Yeah, she’s definitely likeable
R3: I don’t know if I would trust her, she gets paid to say stuff. But she seems nice
and friendly…. Stylish… she would fit in my friendship group no problem [laughs]
UP483845
56
R4: … nice?
R1: She seems … outgoing
R2: … I don’t know what to add [laughs]
Interviewer: Okay, some of you have already touched on it a little… but why do you think
she is sharing this information with you?
R3: Paid.. probably a s**t tonne
[general laughter]
R4: So we’re all just jealous of how much money they make
[general laughter]
R6: It says it’s an ad in the video title
Interviewer: Do think she’s knowledgeable?
R2, R5, R6: Yes
R1: She knew what she was talking about and she’s said stuff that I know is right so
yep.
R3: She gets told what to say though… she’s just a face for an advert
R1: I don’t know if that’s true. I think she’s spoken about herself
Interviewer: Do you think you would trust her recommendation?
R1, R5, R6: Yes
R3: I don’t think so. Too much false information
R4: Yes I would still trust it. I assume she would only promote stuff she agrees with.
Maybe?
R2: Trust her? Yeah probably
Interviewer: Are you aware of the brand The Body Shop?
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6: Yes
Interviewer: Would you use their products?
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6: Yes
[Shows participants video 2]
Interviewer: Okay, so do you feel any differently after that?
UP483845
57
R6: Well I want to go out and buy lots of new shower gel now [laughs]
R5: Me too, shall we go to Gunwharf after?
[general laughter]
R2: Yes, I want to buy stuff
R1: You’re all so easily swayed
R6: I really am
Interviewer: So do you think you can assess her motivation for sharing this information?
R6: It seems more natural than the other one. But the title didn’t say ad so I
immediately believe what she says more
R4: I don’t know what I think any more, I’m confused after discussing it all [laughs].
When I watch it at home I don’t question what they’re saying. I think it must change
what I buy though which is embarrassing.
R6: I think we’ve established that most of us are gullible with it though.
Interviewer: Okay, so why do you think she has made this video?
R3: I guess because she knows what she’s talking about and it’s her job to share
information
[general agreement]
Interviewer: Do you think you would trust her recommendation?
R6: I would trust this more than the other one
[general agreement]
R1: It seems more natural, like she’s just having a chat
[general agreement]
Interviewer: Just to be clear, would you all trust her?
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6: Yes
Interviewer: Alright, thank you all very much for your time. Do you have anything else you
would like to add?
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6: No
Interviewer: Excellent, again, thank you. All responses will be anonymised and confidential.
Good luck with all of your university work!
UP483845
58
UP483845
59
Focus Group Two Results
Interviewer: Hi everyone, thank you for coming here today. I’ll just give you a brief
overview of what we are doing. You are all here because you previously confirmed that you
watch beauty videos on YouTube. I’m going to ask you a few questions regarding viewing
habits and then show you a couple of videos and ask some more questions after the videos
have been shown. While I will be asking some questions, please feel free to speak freely and
in as much detail as possible.
Interviewer: Okay, so how many hours do you spend watching beauty videos per week,
roughly?
Respondent 1: Normally a Sunday morning so 3 probably.
Respondent 3: Maybe 2
Respondent 5: Depends what I watch and what it plays for me so I’ll say 2 as well.
Respondent 2: I only watch a couple of videos a week so that’s definitely under an
hour
Respondent 4: I’m the same
Respondent 6: Me too
Interviewer: Do you spread them out over the week?
R1, R3: No
R2: Yeah, I watch them when I want a tutorial
R5: I just let it automatically play stuff and if it grabs my attention I carry on
watching but go on YouTube on a couple of times a week.
R4: I just watch whenever I feel like it, sometimes it’s in one go but sometimes it’s
just whenever I want a cup of tea and I’ll only watch one.
R6: [nods] me too.
Interviewer: What types of video do you watch?
R2: Mainly for make up or hair or things I just don’t know how to do like clean my
brushes.
R3: I just binge watch hauls and favourite videos and whatever else pops up,
normally on a hangover day and then I end up spending loads of money online
[laughs]
UP483845
60
R1: Pretty much what I do as well.
R4: When I get a craving to buy new stuff or go to Primark or whatever I put on
videos of shiny new stuff like a magpie [laughs]
R5: Oh god me too. I just like new stuff all the time and buying a lipstick satisfies
that without breaking the bank.
R6: I’m like that too, I watch tutorials normally to see how a product works and then
I always want it
Interviewer: Okay, so would you say watching videos affects your purchase behaviour?
R6: Oh 100%.
R5: We’re both suckers for it. It’s a good way to find out about new products or
offers that are currently on.
R1: Yep, it definitely makes me spend money I don’t need to spend
R3: Agreed
R2: I don’t think it does for me, maybe ‘cause I watch tutorials as I need to do a make
up look I don’t know?
R4: I normally watch hauls when I know I want to buy stuff and I get an idea of what
is in the shop and see a review before I go in so yeah it does but not in the same way
as everyone else I don’t think.
Interviewer: Do you follow vloggers on multiple social media channels?
R4: Do you mean on like Instagram and stuff?
Interviewer: Yes
R4: Oh yes then, mostly Instagram
R2, R3, R6: Same
R1: I follow some people on Snapchat too, but yeah mainly Instagram
R5: Yeah I follow a few bloggers on Snapchat
Interviewer: Why do you follow the bloggers that you do?
R1: … I guess I like their style?
R2: Yeah same, style I like or aspire too I guess
R3: They have to be entertaining and have a similar style to me, there’s no point
watching a video where I don’t like any of the stuff
R2: Very true
UP483845
61
R4: Yeah same, anyone entertaining is fine and where I can see that I would get on
with them
R5: I guess I’m the same but I never really thought about it.
R6: Me either
Interviewer: Do you think you can judge whether a product if being shown or used because
the vlogger has been paid or because they are just naturally discussing their own experiences?
R1: It’s not something I think about until it’s pointed out so not very well, no.
R3: I think I can judge it okay, yeah, I trust what’s being said so hope I would be
informed if something was an advert.
R2: I don’t mind too much if it’s an advert though.
R3: Really?
R2: Yeah, it doesn’t matter.
R4: If I’m being told then yeah I don’t mind but if I’m having to guess then I don’t
like that.
R6: Agreed
R5: Yeah, I want to be able to trust what I’m watching online
Interviewer: Well that leads me on to my next question nicely; do you think a vlogger is a
good source for information?
R5: In general, yeah, I think I have more trust if I get told that stuff has been paid to
advertise.
R4: Yeah, I would rather know that an ad has been paid for than have to go on my
guess.
R3: I think they are, I get to see the products being used and so I can make my own
judgments on what they are saying.
R2: It’s just such an easy way to find out what’s currently in shops and what brands
to look out for.
R3: Yeah, that’s exactly it.
R1: I like getting information from people who know more about the products than
me and my friends do.
R6: I like that too, yeah.
UP483845
62
Interviewer: Typically, do you think you respond differently to products that are clearly an
advert versus those where it isn’t clear, and if so why do you think that is?
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6: Yes
Interviewer: Why do you think that is?
R2: I prefer it if something hasn’t been paid to be there.
R6: Yeah I’m more likely to want to buy a product if it isn’t an advert.
R2: Same
R3: Me too
Interviewer: So if a product looks like it’s being discussed naturally, without
payment, do you think it makes you feel more positively, negatively, or about the
same towards a brand?
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6: Positively
Interviewer: Do you think that whether the review is positive, negative or neutral has any
effect on how you feel about the product?
R2: A positive review makes me want to buy a product without any questions asked. I
don’t look any for any other reviews really but if it’s a negative review I scour the
internet a bit to see how accurate it is.
R1: Oh really? I’m the opposite and if there’s a bad review then it’s not a product I
want to consider.
R3: I’m more like that.
R4: Me too.
Interviewer: And you two?
R5: I agree with R1
R6: So do I.
Interviewer: Do you think the credibility of the reviewer is important to you?
R1: Yeah
R2: Yeah I want to be able to trust what’s being said.
R4: I respect when they directly acknowledge that they have been given a product
free. So it’s not being paid to be there but they also haven’t paid anything for it. It’s
kind of like an indirect ‘try before you buy’ for me.
UP483845
63
R3: Yeah I agree; I would rather they just say that they got given something than hide
it… No one realistically buys 20 lipsticks in one go.. although if you had a lot of
money then you would do I guess.
R4: Yeah to be fair to them, if we had a lot of money then we probably would.
R3: That’s true yeah [laughs]
Interviewer: Okay so, how do you tend to assess the level of expertise of the vlogger?
R4: I think by how professional the video looks. They could know nothing but if the
video looks nice I assume they know what they’re talking about. [laughs]
R2: Yeah, if I’m watching in 1080p then they’ve invested money into their equipment
and I can assess how good they are at make-up [laughs]
[general laughter]
R2: If they’re clearly not very good at makeup then I don’t want to listen to what they
have to say.
R3: I don’t know, it’s kind of endearing if they acknowledge that something has gone
wrong. Like if they said ‘I just stuck my mascara brush in my eye’ then I’m all like ‘I
get you boo’
R2: [laughs] Yeah I like that, but if they’re just bright orange with really cakey make
up then they don’t know about colour matching foundation and I assume someone
giving out tips on how to do makeup should be able to do that at least.
R3: Okay, yeah, I agree with that.
Interviewer: Okay so what about everyone else, what cues do you use to work out
how expert they are?
R1: How many followers they have?
R5: Yeah I would agree with that.
R6: Yeah just everything that’s been said really. I don’t necessarily think that those
with the most followers know the most stuff.
R1: Oh yeah true. There are makeup artists on YouTube that don’t have millions of
followers but they actually know the most.
Interviewer: So if a brand chooses to work with a vlogger do you think it’s important for the
attributes of the brand to match with the attributes of the vlogger?
R6: Yeah definitely.
UP483845
64
R2: Yep, you can’t just have a blogger something completely random it wouldn’t
work
R1: Yeah they have to be a similar style
R2: Yeah
R3: Well for that two minutes or whatever the blogger is being.. I Don’t know.. the
face? Of the brand so it has to all work together with the look of the video and stuff as
well
Interviewer: Fabulous, okay, are you aware of the brand E45?
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6: Yes
Interviewer: Would you use their products?
R1: If I have really dry skin then it’s a brand I pick up.
R2: Me too
R5: Only if it’s something I need.
R3: Yeah it’s something I use.
R6: I’ve never used it but that’s not to say that I wouldn’t.
R4: I use it occasionally.
Interviewer: Right, I’m going to show you a short clip and then ask you a few questions.
[Shows participants video 1]
Interviewer: I’ll ask again; would you use e45?
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6: Yes
Interviewer: Do you think the video had an effect on your answer?
R1, R5, R6: Yes
R4: It made it seem like it’s a more everyday product than I think it is so I would be
more inclined to use it for the winter.
R2: I agree, seeing a person talk about it positively in front of you just makes it seem
like it’s a better product.
R3: Yeah it makes it seem like a really really good, cheap moisturiser and even
though I know it is, I just feel more like it must be great.
UP483845
65
Interviewer: How do you perceive the YouTuber?
R1: She seems to know what she’s talking about.
R3: Yeah, she’s clearly talking from experience and I like that.
R4: She seems friendly and open
R2: I think she’s someone I would get along with and so I instantly trust her more.
R5: If it was someone who was clearly reading out a script like a TV ad I wouldn’t
get through the video I would just turn it off.
R6: Oh my god, same.
Interviewer: Why do you think she has shared this information online?
R1: It says in the video title that it’s an ad so she’s been paid to say it, but it doesn’t
say whether she got told exactly what to say in the video or she was able to talk
around it.
R2: She’s shared it because she got paid.
R3: Paid too.
R4: Yeah, paid
R5: Clearly paid, but I like all the information around just selling a product that
seems more natural than a normal advert.
R6: Yeah, I agree with R5, it doesn’t seem so much like an advert.
Interviewer: Do you mind if a product is being paid to be on a vloggers channel?
R2: Not too much, I assume that if they have accepted to be paid for an advert they
are happy to endorse the product. If you do something that has your face all over it
and is your source of income, you would only want to promote stuff you know is
good or it will come back on you. So I don’t mind if something is being paid to be on
there because I still think it’s something they like but if it’s something completely
irrelevant to what they normally speak about then it flags up in my head like
something isn’t right here.
R1: That was a good way of putting it, yeah if someone who normally talks about
high street beauty products and then suddenly starts raving about a hundred pound
moisturiser it will immediately make me think it’s not an unbiased review of the
product.
R3: [laughs] They’ve covered everything. I second that anything that sticks out like it
shouldn’t be there is something I don’t really pay attention too.
UP483845
66
R4: I don’t think I’ve ever seen that but it would be off putting.
R5: I mean. R2 said everything [laughs].
R6: I don’t have anything to add to that [laughs].
Interviewer: Are you aware of the brand The Body Shop?
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6: Yes
Interviewer: Would you use their products?
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6: Yes
[Shows participants video 2]
Interviewer: So now how do you feel about The Body Shop?
R1: I just feel reminded of why I like The Body Shop.
R3: I want to go and have a look what they have in at the moment now. Or just have a
browse around Boots. Is it bad that that makes me want to go shopping?
R2: No, I do too, and now I feel like I should consider The Body Shop more, I forget
about it because it’s not somewhere I automatically go but I think I would make a bit
of an effort to go out of my way to go in.
R1: Agreed
R5: I don’t think it’s changed how I feel about The Body Shop; I’ve always liked it
but now I do want to treat myself to something little like a new body wash or body
butter.
R4: Me too
R6: I guess it just kind of puts the brand in your head doesn’t it.
Interviewer: What do you think her motivation is to share this information online?
R1: It’s not as obvious as the last video whether it is paid for or not. It seems just as
natural but more like it’s something she’s picked up and is just speaking about
because it’s her job.
R3: Yeah, I assume she’s just posted this because she wants to let other people know
how nice the products are just because.
R2: It’s just her job isn’t it, like if she didn’t have stuff on her channel then she
wouldn’t be making any money out of it.
UP483845
67
R5: It’s the same way you share products with your friends but blogging just seems to
be the new thing to do.
Interviewer: Okay, thank you all, I know you need to revise, so thank you for giving up your
time, good luck with your exams!
Recommended
