HOW INFLUENCERS` CREDIBILITY ON INSTAGRAM

IS PERCEIVED BY CONSUMERS AND ITS IMPACT ON

PURCHASE INTENTION

MARTA REBELO

DISSERTATION WRITTEN UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF PROFESSOR

CAROLINA AFONSO

DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE MSC IN BUSINESS ADMNISTRATION, AT THE UNIVERSIDADE
CATÓLICA PORTUGUESA, MAY 2017
ABSTRACT

Title: How influencers’ credibility on Instagram is perceived by consumers and its

impact on purchase intention

Author: Marta Figueiredo Rebelo

The purpose of this thesis is to understand the perception Instagram users, in other words
consumers, have of influencers they follow on Instagram. Consumer perceived
credibility of influencers, and its impact on the purchase intention, is therefore studied.
This dissertation aims to highlight which credibility dimensions better explain the
purchase intention. Gender is also explored to verify behavior differences between
female and male consumers.

To better analyze the perceived credibility of influencers and purchase intention, scales
previously developed were applied and adapted as proposed by Ohanian (1990) and
Dodds, Monroe & Grewal (1991), respectively.

The present study is exploratory and quantitative. It was implemented through an online
survey, where only active Instagram users that follow one or more influencers on the
platform were selected. Overall, 285 valid responses were collected.

The results of the present study indicate that perceived “attractiveness” and
“trustworthiness” of influencers are the dimensions of credibility that better explain
consumers’ purchase intention. In what concerns gender differences, it is verified that
more female than male consumers are influenced by perceived trustworthiness.

The developed model aims to support brands and marketers in better understanding the
effects perceived credibility of influencers has on consumption, and of its impact in
purchase intention.

2
RESUMO

T
ítu
lo:Comoac
red
ibi
lid
adeno
sinfl
uen
ciado
resdoIns
tag
ramép
erc
ebi
dap
elo
s
c
onsumi
dor
eseoimpac
toquecau
sanain
tençãodecompr
a

Au
tor
a:M
art
aFi
gue
ire
doR
ebe
lo

Oprop ó
si
tod e
state
s eéc ompreenderasperc
epçõesqueosuti
li
zadoresdoIn st
agram,
quen es
tec asosãoo sc on
sum idore
s,têm par
ai nte
ragi
rc omi nf
luenc
i adore
sn o
Ins
ta g
ram.D es
taf orma,ée s
tud adooim pac
toqu eac red
ibi
lida
dep ercebidapel
os
consumidor
esnest
esIn f
luenci
ador e
stemn ain
tençãodec omp
ra.Estadis
sertaçãovi
sa
des
tacarquai
sostiposd ecred
ibil
idadequem e
lhorexpl
icamaintençãodec om p
ra.Os
doi
sg énero
sdo sc onsumido
ress ãotam b
émex plor
ados,dem odoav e
rifi
c a
rs ehá
di
ferença
sn ocomportamentoentreosh om
ense mulhe
res
.

P
aracom p
reendermelh
oroim pa
ctoqueo sinf
lue
nciado
restêmn asperc
ep çõ
esde
c
red
ibi
lida
dedo scon
sumido
resenain
tençãodecom p
ra,fo
ramu t
il
izad
asea dapt
adas
e
sca
lasprev
iamentep
ropos
taspo
rO ha
nian(1990
)eD odds
,M onroe &Grewal(1991
),
r
espe
cti
vam en
te
.

Opresen
teestudoée xp
lora
tór
ioequant
ita
tiv
o.N afas
ed er
ecolhadedadosfoife
itoum
ques
tioná
rioonline
,on defo
rams e
lec
ionadosapenasosuti
li
zadore
sdoIn st
a g
ramqu e
seconsi
derama c
tivosequeseguemumoum ai
si n
fluen
cia
doresnapla
taf
o rma.N o
tot
al
for
amob tid
a s285respos
tasvá
lid
as.

O
sresul
tadosobt
i dosnes
teestudoind
icamqu ea“ atr
act
ivi
d a
de”ea“ conf
iab
il
id ade
”
p
erceb
idapelo
sc onsumido
resn o
sinf
luenc
iadore
ssã oasdimensõ
esdecred
ibi
lid
ad eque
m
elho
re xpl
icamai n
tençã
od ec ompra
.R el
ativ
am enteàsdife
rençasen
trehom ense
m
ulhe
res
,c ons
tat
a- s
equ eapercepç
ãod aconf
iab
ili
d adedeumi nf
luenc
iado
rtem m ai
s
i
nfl
uêncianasm ulhe
resdoqu enoshomens.

Omodel
od es
envo
lvi
dot
emc omoobj
ect
ivoauxi
li
armar
casema
rke
tee
rs acom
preende
r
m
elh
oroim pac
toqueac
redib
il
ida
deperc
ebi
d ape
losc
onsum
ido
resno
sin
flu
enc
iador
es
t
emn aint
ençãodecomp
ra.

3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Carolina Afonso, who supported me in

every stage of this research, without whom it would have been impossible to accomplish
this goal – especially for encouraging me to write about this new topic. She instantly
understood my passion for Instagram, and has constantly guided me in the right
direction.

I would also like to thank my friends and colleagues that consistently supported me
throughout this challenging task, particularly Marta Lopes for all the advice she provided
me with while constructing this thesis.

Last, but not least, I must express my profound gratitude towards my parents, sister and
boyfriend for always believing me and comforting me in despairing times. Especially
my father, with his inspiring wisdom and positive energy. This accomplishment would
not have been possible without them.

4
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 9

1.1 Background .........................................................................................................................................................9
1.2 Problem statement ......................................................................................................................................... 11
1.3 Aim ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12
1.4 Scope ................................................................................................................................................................... 12
1.5 Research method............................................................................................................................................ 12
1.6 Academic and managerial relevance .................................................................................................... 13
1.7 Dissertation outline ...................................................................................................................................... 16
Chapter 2. Literature Review and Conceptual Framework ............................................ 17
2.1 Web 2.0 and the Emergence of Social Media (SM) ......................................................................... 17
2.1.1 Definition of SM...................................................................................................................................17
2.1.2 Main SM platforms .............................................................................................................................17
2.1.3 Importance of SM for businesses and consumers ...................................................................18
2.1.4 Benefits of using SM platforms .....................................................................................................20
2.1.5 SM platforms in Portugal..................................................................................................................21
2.2 Influencers presence on Instagram ........................................................................................................ 22
2.2.1 The emergence of Instagram ...........................................................................................................22
2.2.2 Influencers ...............................................................................................................................................23
2.2.3 Instagram in a business context ......................................................................................................25
2.2.4 Main brands’ presence on Instagram ...........................................................................................26
2.3 The role of credibility to explain the interaction with influencers and the impact on
purchase intention................................................................................................................................................. 27
2.3.1 Definition of credibility .....................................................................................................................27
2.3.2 Attractiveness.........................................................................................................................................28
2.3.3 Trustworthiness .....................................................................................................................................28
2.3.4 Expertise ..................................................................................................................................................29
2.4 Purchase intention ........................................................................................................................................ 29
2.5 Gender................................................................................................................................................................ 31
2.6 Conclusion and conceptual framework ................................................................................................ 32
Chapter 3. Methodology .............................................................................................................. 34
3.1 Research approach ....................................................................................................................................... 34
3.2 Research instruments ................................................................................................................................... 35
3.2.1 Population and sample .......................................................................................................................35
3.2.2 The survey ...............................................................................................................................................35
3.2.3 The measures..........................................................................................................................................36
Chapter 4. Results analysis ......................................................................................................... 37
4.1 Preliminary analysis .................................................................................................................................... 37
4.1.1 Data collection and analysis ............................................................................................................37
4.1.2 Sample characterization.....................................................................................................................37
4.1.3 Data screening – univariate and multivariate outliers ...........................................................40
4.1.4 Data reliability .......................................................................................................................................40
4.1.5 Principal component analysis (PCA) ...........................................................................................41
4.1.6 Correlation analysis .............................................................................................................................42
4.1.7 Descriptive statistics ...........................................................................................................................43
4.2 In-depth analysis............................................................................................................................................ 44

5
 4.2.1 Research questions ..............................................................................................................................44
Chapter 5. Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 51
5.1 Academic contributions............................................................................................................................... 51
5.2 Managerial contributions........................................................................................................................... 52
5.3 Limitations and future research recommendations ......................................................................... 54
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................... 56

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 76

6
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Top 13 social media platforms visual comparison……………………...…..18

Figure 2. Number of monthly active Instagram users from January
2013 to April 2017 (in millions)…………………………………………………...…23
Figure 3. Top 15 leading brands ranked by number of Instagram
followers (in millions)…………………………………………………………………26
Figure 4. Conceptual framework………………….……………………………...…...32
Figure 5. Gender distribution………………………………………………………….37
Figure 6. Age distribution………………..………………………………….…...……38
Figure 7. Occupation distribution…………………………………………….…...…..38
Figure 8. Education level distribution…………………………………………………39
Figure 9. Monthly net income distribution……………………………………………39

7
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Scales’ reliability test analysis……………………………………………….40

Table 2. Pearson correlation’s analysis………………………………………………..43
Table 3. Linear regression – credibility and purchase intention……………………....44
Table 4. Multiple linear regression – attractiveness, trustworthiness, expertise
and purchase intention………………………………………………………………...45
Table 5. Chi-square test – gender and attractiveness………………………………….46
Table 6. Chi-square test – gender and trustworthiness………………………………..46
Table 7. Chi-square test – gender and expertise………………………………………47
Table 8. Chi-square test – gender and purchase intention…………………………….47
Table 9. Female – multiple linear regression – attractiveness, trustworthiness,
expertise and purchase intention………………………………………………………48
Table 10. Male – multiple linear regression – attractiveness, trustworthiness,
expertise and purchase intention……………………………………………………....49

8
Chapter 1. Introduction

1.1 Background
The omnipresent smartphone and other mobile devices have generated lots of Social
Media (SM) applications (Yadava, Joshia & Rahmanb, 2015). SM has become essential
for social networking and content sharing (Asur & Huberman, 2010), but also performs
an important role in the economic interests of small businesses (Habibi et al, 2014).
Therefore, according to Evans, Bratton, & McKee (2010), the possibility of SM
marketing in marketers’ business activities may be an advantage.

Regarding SM platforms, Instagram stands out because it is the fastest growing SM

network nowadays (Garifova, 2016). The quick evolution of Instagram (90 million
monthly active users since 2013 to 700 million monthly active users in 2017) provides
an increasing number of organizations pondering to promote in the platform, and for
some of them it is an essential prerequisite (Statista.com 2017). Moreover, Instagram
gained 1 million users two months after its launching and hasn’t stopped growing
consistently every year. If comparing Instagram’s with other SM growth, Twitter took 2
years to reach the exact same amount of users and Foursquare, 1 year (Instagram.com,
2017).

This rise of Instagram has also been accompanied by that of brands investing on a
presence on this SM network. Forrester research (2017) demonstrates that more than half
of the top 50 brands (58%) post on Instagram an average of 5.6 times per week. Also, its
engagement with brands is 10 times higher than Facebook’s, 54 times higher than
Pinterest’s and 84 times higher than Twitter’s. Additionally, engagement per post has
risen 416% in 2 years. These Instagram data show how imperative this trend is for
advertisers wanting to achieve their audience (Brandwatch.com, 2016).

SM evolution has led to the emergence of influencers such as “Instagrammers”,

“YouTubers” and “Bloggers”. Influencers are common Internet users who gather a huge
following on SM through the engagement with followers in digital and physical spaces
by coordinating advertorials into their SM posts (Senft, 2008). Several advertorials in
the influencer business are exceptionally customized, since they give their opinion about
products and services they experienced themselves and endorse for a fee (Abidin, 2016).
In addition, van der Waldt et al. (2009: 102) wrote that the “right choice of influencer

9
can be effective in establishing a position for newly launched product and it can also
change perceptions on a product that has been positioned in a wrong way”.

Therefore, for marketing managers, understanding the consumer perception of

influencers might enable more efficiency (van der Waldt et al., 2009).

Since consumers usually tend to perceive friends and the influencers they follow as more
credible than distant and motivated sources (Neilsen, 2013), plenty research was
conducted to explore consumers’ perceived credibility of influencers. To fulfill that, a
large literature on “source effects” was executed (Janis and Hovland 1959; Ohanian
1990). Moreover, consumers are increasingly skeptical about marketing advertisers
(Campbell and Kirmani 2008; Friestad and Wright 1994) and, consequently, there is a
craving for product and message authenticity (Brown, Kozinets, and Sherry 2003).

Since consumers perceive the content generated by influencers as more credible than the
content provided by the sellers (Jonas, 2010), their willingness to set a purchase intention
might increase (Waldt, Loggerenberg & Wehmeyer, 2009; Fan & Miao, 2012).
Additionally, Lecinski (2011) reported that 70% of purchase decisions occur during
online search, specifically when products are recommended. Fleishman-Hillard and
Harris (2012) reveal that 89% of consumers buy products through the Internet.

So, exploring Instagram users’ perceived credibility of influencers is relevant for

marketers and brand managers, as consumers buy a greater amount of a company product
when influencers develop credibility in their relationship with the product, and
demonstrate they would appreciate to use that specific product (Erdogan, 1999; Ohanian,
1991; van der Waldt et al., 2009).

Considering consumers get and share information on products and services via digital
platforms (Clemons, 2009), in order to increase purchase intention, organizations need
to meet the goals and requests of consumers (Fortsythe et al., 2003). To attain it is critical
to deeply investigate the impact of the perceived credibility of an influencer as a
determinant of purchase intention, and which dimensions of credibility have a higher
influence on purchase intention. Therefore, this study aims to examine whether the
influencer influences purchase intention.

Besides that, according to Fan & Miao (2012), gender affects communication. In virtual

10
communities, being a female or male consumer is a significant and relevant aspect on
communication and purchase transactions. It is thus fundamental to understand gender
differences in their purchase intentions (Chiu, Lin & Tang, 2005), to support their
presence, and to promote the development of online shopping. One other goal of this
study is therefore to understand the differences of each gender regarding the relation
between the perceived credibility of an influencer and purchase intention.

1.2 Problem statement

Past research shows that with the emergence of SM, the way consumers interact with
brands completely changed. Consumers are getting used to look for information from
individuals with a high rate of visualizations, usually referred as influencers (Liu et al.,
2015). Meanwhile, companies keep making efforts to investigate the impact of
influencers on sales and advertising. Hence, Liu et al. (2015) stated that the ability of
identifying influencers has ended up being important for companies, since with the
utilization of SM platforms advertising messages can be spread faster, and be better
promoted via influencers’ recommendations to their extensive followers. It is thus of
great importance for marketers to understand that if they use SM platforms and its
influencers efficiently, their marketing campaigns may get more consumers and boost
their return rate.

Past research shows that influencers’ image has a positive impact on the image of several
brands (Walker et al., 1992) as well, their endorsement in strengthening companies
financially (Agrawal and Kamakura, 1995; Mathur et al., 1997). Using them as a
marketing tool may consequently help brand managers announcing a new product or
repositioning an existing one (Kaikati, 1987).

According to Sertoglu et al. (2014), if consumers believe the content posted by the
influencer, it is more likely that they will frame a purchase intention. Considering that
SM intrinsically drives consumers to suspect company commercials in SM (Akar &
Topçu, 2011), and since the genuine experience of an experienced consumer is handily
feasible, this problem can be minimized if managers and marketers understand which
perceptions of credibility do Instagram users have of influencers, and the impact these
have on purchase intention. They may then adapt their strategies and convince managers
and marketers that Instagram and influencers are an important “bridge” for purchasing
and promoting the purchase growth.

11
Instagram thus being the platform getting more engagement from consumers
(WeAreSocial.com, 2017), and influencers’ posts a convenient marketing device and an
essential reference source when consumers make a purchase decision (Chen & Xie,
2008), the research problem of this thesis lies in exploring how influencers’ credibility
is perceived by Instagram users, and the effect these influencers might have on purchase
intention.

1.3 Aim
This study proposes to understand to what extent do Instagram users perceive the
credibility of influencers and whether these influence their intention of purchasing the
promoted products. Afterwards, the aim is also to assess if there are differences
concerning each gender, and finally, if it they are verified, which are the main differences
among female and male Instagram users.

In order to acknowledge this aim, two distinct research questions are put forward,
namely:

RSQ1_A – Does perceived credibility of an influencer on Instagram influence purchase

intention of the products promoted by the influencer?

RSQ2_A – Are there any differences on perceived credibility of an influencer and on

purchase intention of the products promoted by the influencer concerning gender -
related characteristics?

1.4 Scope
Through the use of the Instagram platform, the goal of this thesis is mainly to explore
the perceptions of credibility that Instagram users have regarding an influencer, and
subsequently of studying its impact on the purchase intention of the products promoted
by the influencer. Afterwards, it aims to understand if the impact on purchase intention
is different concerning female and male Instagram users’ perceived credibility of
influencers.

1.5 Research method

In this thesis, an exploratory, quantitative and descriptive research approach is taken.
Exploratory, for this topic has not yet been studied in-depth, and it was necessary to
collect some data through qualitative research.

12
The study is also quantitative, since primary data is the main source to conduct this
research, by analyzing the major perceived credibility dimensions of an influencer and
their impact on purchase intention and also by exploring if there are any differences on
the impact of these constructs through an analysis of the different genders.

Descriptive, since some studies have already analyzed credibility aspects of consumers
to follow an endorser and further the purchase intention aspects. Therefore, it is also
supported by secondary data collected through quantitative research.

Moreover, the study is based only on the behavior of active Portuguese Instagram users,
aged 18 years old or up, that follow one or more Influencers on Instagram. A quantitative
and exploratory study is thus held with primary data collected through an online and
self-administered survey made in Qualtrics and later analyzed in SPSS.

1.6 Academic and managerial relevance

According to Messik (2012) Social Media can be considered as an intra-organizational
communications tool and since more customers are adopting their mobile devices as a
tool to search and make purchases online, more attention should be paid from
entrepreneurs to improve their sites, so they can be convenient in usability, in order to
better target their audiences. Therefore, it is fundamental to know how to use all the
features that SM marketing include in today circumstances (Garifova, 2016).

Additionally, Garifova (2016) pointed out that Facebook mostly represents the raise of
SM networks, followed up by Twitter and more recently by Instagram. Garifova (2016)
also invoked that the evidence that Instagram is quickly developing contributes to the
fact that more companies fancy to promote in this network.

Academically speaking, very little research concerns the potential of Instagram

influencers nowadays. Despite the field being relatively new, previous studies provided
empirical support of influencers’ importance and of the general qualities of an influencer
(Zhang, Moe & Schweidel, 2017; Kapitan and Silvera, 2016; Freberg et al., 2010;
Mangold & Faulds, 2009). However, these studies are focused on other popular social
media networks, such as Blogs, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube (Uzunoglu & Kip,
2014), with no considerable amount of research made in direct regard to Instagram.
Additionally, instead of the Instagram’s influencers context that is studied in the present
research, current studies regarding Instagram focus mostly on other fields (Bakhshi et

13
al., 2014; Hochman and Schwartz, 2012; Hu et al., 2014; Silva et al., 2013).

Moreover, few studies have considered consumers’ credibility factors to interact with
influencers through Blogs (Ohanian, 1990). However, to the best of our knowledge, no
other studies were conducted and applied to the Portuguese market about the specific
Instagram platform. Moving forward, as consumers are increasingly applying social
media as a source of information related to the brands they aim to know better (Baird
and Parasnis, 2011; Naylor et al., 2012) and because the information provided by
influencers influences positive perceptions of credibility on consumers (Chu and Choi,
2011; Chu and Kim, 2011), the present thesis aims to understand the perceived
credibility of these influencers on Instagram users, based on several studies (Ohanian,
2010; Sertoglu et al., 2014; Newell and Goldsmith, 2001; Cosenza et al., 2015; Cheng
and Ho, 2014).

Again, since consumers purchase more products from a company when influencers can
build credibility about their relationship with the product by showing their followers
they would appreciate to use the particular product (Erdogan, 1999; Ohanian, 1991; van
der Waldt et al., 2009), the main goal of this study is to explore Instagram users’
perceived credibility of an influencer as to understand the impact on purchase intention
(Dodds et al., 1991; Akar and Aslihan, 2015; Jiménez and Mendoza, 2013; Taylor and
Baker, 1994), based in a few studies (Sertoglu, Catli & Korkmaz, 2014; Ohanian, 1990).

The findings from this study aspire to make a contribution to the broad literature and its
research efforts to formulate new and fresh variables on the digital consumer behavior
subject, throughout the investigation of the link between Instagram users’ perceived
credibility of influencers on Instagram platform, and consequently its impact on the
purchase intention of the products promoted by the influencers. Afterwards, it also aims
to explore gender – related differences among the same constructs, since several studies
prove that are considerable differences regarding gender characteristics (Flanagan and
Metzger, 2003; Ferebee, 2008; Deaux & Kite, 1987; Meyers-Levy & Sternthal, 1991;
Hinz, McCarthy & Schlarbaum, 1977; Allen, 2001; Kwak et al., 2002; Slyke et al. 2002;
Rodger & Harrys, 2004).

For management, being the influencer the main source of information, perceived
credibility is a meaningful aspect for the advertiser (Friedman et al., 1978). Moreover,

14
brands are recognizing the power of influencers to directly influence their connected
network by making suggestions, which result in the search for purchasable products
(Flynn, Goldsmith & Eastman, 1996). Therefore, companies are looking for ways of
using this influence in order to create interest, drive action, create goodwill, establish
expertise and dialogue with their online stakelholders (Gardner, 2005), instead of
focusing only on conventional media. Consequently, by understanding the opportunities
influencers provide, marketers seek to benefit from characteristics such as their
perceived credibility (Schmallegger & Carson, 2008).

According to Katz & Lazarsfel (1995) it is difficult for brand managers to communicate
directly with consumers, but they have the opportunity to influence it by using
influencers as intermediates. Furthermore, it is important to explore the role that
influencers have on SM as it is found to have impact on consumers’ purchase decisions
(Kaplan & Haenlein, 2009).

Therefore, this dissertation aims to provide relevant managerial implications for

determining the credibility of influencers as perceived by Instagram users and the impact
it has on purchase intention, which intends to help marketers and advertisers when trying
to figure out what perceptions of influencers are better perceived by the Instagram users
to engage with influencers and their purchase intentions. Subsequently, marketers can
better segment and shape strategies by understanding Instagram users’ perceived
credibility of influencers more accurately, and therefore better acknowledge the
underlying mechanism of consumer/Instagram user and influencer on Instagram.

An understanding of gender differences regarding perceived credibility and its relation

with purchasing through SM platforms and purchase intention is also useful for
researchers interested in disclosing insights of purchase intention (Chiu et al., 2005).
Another pertinent question that this research aims therefore to answer, is whether the
credibility of an influencer is perceived differently by female and male Instagram users,
and if their purchase intentions also differ from each other.

To conclude, and since this dissertation is based on active Portuguese Instagram users,
this study hopes to support brand managers as well as marketers to engage in the market
by presenting insights on how influencers’ credibility is perceived by Instagram users,
and the impact it has on the purchase intention of the products promoted by the

15
influencers.

1.7 Dissertation outline

The first chapter presents an introduction to the dissertation’s subject, concerning its
problem statement, aim, scope of analysis, research method and academic and
managerial relevance. The second chapter provides the results of an extensive literature
on social media marketing, particularly on the use of one specific platform, Instagram,
as a business tool. Perceived credibility and purchase intention constructs are explored
along this chapter, as well as the differences between genders. Based on this literature,
research questions arose, concerning the intent to understand the relationship among
these constructs. The third chapter establishes the methodology used throughout this
research in order to collect the data required to analyze the research questions
formulated. In the fourth chapter the primary data is evaluated, the main results are
exposed and a preliminary analysis is attempted, conducive to the confirmation of data
reliability and suitability, followed by an in-depht analysis. Finally, the last chapter
provides the major conclusions of this research, accompanied by the limitations and
recommendations for future research that can be shaped from this subject.

16
Chapter 2. Literature Review and Conceptual Framework

2.1 Web 2.0 and the Emergence of Social Media (SM)

2.1.1 Definition of SM
Firstly, Web 2.0 describes a second generation of the World Wide Web that focuses on
the capacity to cooperate and share information online. In other words, Web 2.0 is the
development from fixed html Web pages to a more charismatic and organized Web that
provides Web applications to users. The main functionality of Web 2.0 is the ability of
sharing more open information (Constantinides & Stefan, 2008).

And Social Media can be considered as Internet–based applications that sustain

consumer–generated content, which includes archives with content established by
experienced consumers that are shared online for others to easily access (Blackshaw,
2006). SM can also be defined as any type of website that allows users to share their
community building, interactions, opinions and views (Kaur, 2016). SM combines
several applications that enable consumers to “post”, “tag” or “blog” on the Internet.

Moreover, consumers post a variety of content on SM with the intent of cultivating each
other about brands, products, services and issues (Blackshaw & Nazzaro, 2006).
Compared with content added by marketers and suppliers, SM is created by consumers
with the only goal of sharing information among themselves.

To conclude, through the emergence of Web 2.0 many consumer–behavior and

marketing analysts considered that brands now have an excellent tool set to cooperate
with their most loyal consumers, and bring associated value for the brand (Cova & Cova,
2002). Thanks to Web 2.0, consumers are becoming significantly empowered in building
relationships with the companies that manage their most loved brands (Uncles, 2008).

2.1.2 Main SM platforms

Through the study conducted by Kallas (2017), the 13 most popular social networks
worldwide are enumerated as follows: Facebook, with 1.94 billion monthly active users;
YouTube: 1 billion; Instagram: 700 million; Twitter: 313 million; Reddit: 250 million;
Vine: 200 million; Pinterest: 150 million; Ask.fm: 160 million; Tumblr: 115 million;
Flickr: 112 million; Google+: 111 million; LinkedIn: 106 million and VK with 90
million monthly active users.

17
Figure 1. Top 13 social media platforms visual comparison
Source: (dreamgrow.com, 2017)

Moreover, according to Kallas (2017) the 10 top social networking apps currently are:
firstly Facebook and WhatsApp, both with 1.2 billion monthly active users; QQ Chat:
899 million; WeChat: 806 million; Instagram: 700 million; QZone: 652 million; Viber:
249 million; LINE: 218 million; Snapchat: 200 million and YY with 122 million
monthly active users.

Focusing on Instagram, its videos have 2 times the engagement of any other social media
platform (Aslam, 2017). Moreover, Instagram hosts 700 million individual accounts,
among which 400 million log on every day. Instagram was bought by $1 billion by
Facebook and nowadays the platform’s current worth is estimated to be of approximately
$50 billion (Hutchinson, 2017). It is also known that 59% of Instagram users are between
18 and 29 years old, followed by 33% between 30 and 49; 18% are between 50 and 64;
and the remaining 8% are over 65 years old (SproutSocial.com, 2017).

2.1.3 Importance of SM for businesses and consumers

Web 2.0 takes a new step forward in the expansion of the Internet in a marketing
environment. Previous studies advocate that young consumers have already adopted
online SM as an inherent part of their life (Bizreport.com, 2007). Furthermore, online
consumers have perceived Web 2.0 applications as a source of empowerment, not only
in the shape of content sourcing and communities of dialogue. but also as one of
confrontation of producers and vendors concerning their commercial, ethical and social

18
responsibilities.

According to Damanpour and Gopalakrishnan (2001), conventional communication in

marketing has been seriously depreciated since the development of the engagement
aspect arrived to marketing (Mangold & Faulds, 2009; Muñiz & Schau, 2007).

Moreover, Lea et al. (2006) and Dwyer (2007) consider SM as virtual communities,
groups of consumers connected with each other that interact over the Internet. Dholakia
et al. (2004) state that their intention is to achieve common and personal goals.
Consequently, considering that B2C companies are already familiar with the
development of virtual communities, perceiving SM as virtual communities implies an
opportunity for B2C companies to take advantage of this SM and of Web 2.0
technologies for targeting the user they want to reach.

Past research represents SM as a component of the promotional mix (Mangold & Faulds,
2009; Muñiz & Schau, 2007) since integrated marketing communication (B2C) tools are
incorporated, marketing professionals are not able to control the distribution, range and
type of information. As consumers increasingly distance themselves from the
conventional promotional approaches, these SM are essential for companies that make
use of, and acknowledge, them. Although the conventional media ends in a compromise
between the approach and commitment of consumers, SM facilitates both the approach
and the commitment of said consumers (Hanna, Rohm, & Crittenden, 2011; Edelman,
2010).

Moreover, some studies recognize the significance of SM as a platform for building and
conveying an image for the brands, and therefore for making sales. Besides, SM went
from engaging and communicating with consumers to a mode of generating revenues
(Wang and Zhang, 2012; Barnes, 2014). Research shows that almost 40% of SM users
had bought a product after sharing it on SM sites. The growing attendance of colossal
brands on SM sites demonstrates that these sites are increasingly in SM industry (Pelet
and Papadopolou, 2013; Liang et al., 2011).

Additionally, Shadkam and O’Hara (2013) claim that Instagram accounts and Facebook
pages are examples that social industry provides businesses by selling to consumers from
SM platforms. Therefore, social industry represents an electronic business in which the
consumer is more participative than ever (Liang et al. 2011). Hence, SM and digital

19
platforms may be considered as a set of collaborative tools that connect consumers and
with which marketing can be developed (Quinton, 2013).

To conclude, this evolution brought a new consumer profile denominated the “online
consumer” (Racolta-Paina & Luca, 2010). This online consumer performs an essential
role in the e–commerce and has distinct buying habits compared with conventional
consumers. Therefore, companies should consider online consumers’ needs, behaviors,
lifestyles and purchase intentions in order to satisfy them in a highly dynamic and
competitive market.

2.1.4 Benefits of using SM platforms

From a consumer’s perspective, the utilization of information provided on SM offers
several benefits, such as convenience, efficiency, participative and wealthier
information, a more extensive selection of products, cost reduction, high variety of
products and competitive pricing (Bayo-Moriones & Lera-Lopez, 2007). Besides, one
of the biggest benefits of using SM in research is the speed of response and immediacy
of information (Quinton, 2013).

Online social networking usually tends to upgrade these benefits, considering it provides
a more proactive communication between consumers. For instance, through SM,
consumers can search for others’ opinions about particular products (Henderson, 2011).
Hence, consumers have been demonstrating to esteem peer judgments more than
company promotions, which represent a shift in the locus of persuasive power (Berthon,
Pitt, Plangger, & Shapiro, 2012; Pitt, Berthon, Watson, & Zinkhan, 2002).

The marketer benefits of using SM based on consumers strategy are as follows: the
consumer purchases the product, uses it, shapes an opinion about it and afterwards
communicates with other consumers. Based on this, the marketer considers the last step,
communication between consumers, an opportunity to increase recognition of how
consumers perceive their products and services. Afterwards, marketers can choose what
to take in consideration for improving their products and services (Evans, Bratton, &
McKee, 2010). Besides that, SM offers researchers opportunities to research areas that
were once impossible to access (Hookway, 2008).

20
2.1.5 SM platforms in Portugal
In 2005, Portugal was considered the 15th worldwide in mobile communication
penetration rated by 82% (Union, 2009). By the end of 2012, the mobile penetration rose
to 156%, verifying that Portuguese citizens have more than one mobile phone per person
(Anacom, 2012). The use of Internet multiplied because of the increasing access to high–
speed wireless networks and adoption of mobile phones. According to Seybert (2012),
Portugal has an Internet penetration rate in excess of 61%.

SM popularity and growth between consumers is prominent. There is an evolution since

the number of active SM users is already 2.307 billion (Kemp, 2016). Specifically in
Portugal, SM utilization has triplicated along the last seven years (Lusa, 2016).

In addition to this, Portugal has a total population of 10.28 million, within which 6.10
million are active SM users that spend on average almost 2h18min per day on SM
platforms (Hootsuite, 2017). SM users’ market penetration in Portugal is higher on
Facebook platform, followed by Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn and then by Snapchat
(Marktest, 2016). And finally, in Portugal, 67% of SM users follow public figures and
62% follow brands in SM platforms.

The most active SM platforms in Portugal are, first, Facebook with a percentage of 64%
active users; Youtube: 63%; FB Messenger: 41%; Instagram: 32%; Google+ and
WhatsApp: 27%; Skype and Twitter: 25%; LinkedIn: 24%; Pinterest: 21%; Snapchat:
16% and Tumblr with 13% of active users (wearesocial.com, 2017). Also, and to better
understand the importance of e–commerce activities, Wearesocial.com (2017) reported
that 60% of Portuguese citizens search online for a product or service to purchase per
month, 56% visit an online retail store and 39% buy a product or service online, also on
a monthly basis.

Focusing on Instagram users, in Portugal there are 1.9 million active users, which are
distributed as follows: users between 13 and 17 years old represent 11%; 18-24 years:
36%; 25-34 years: 26%; 35-44 years: 16%; 45-54 years: 7%; and finally, users 55 years
or over represent 4%. Also interesting for this study is that in Portugal 54% of Instagram
users are female, and 46% are male (napoleancat.com, 2016).

21
2.2 Influencers presence on Instagram

2.2.1 The emergence of Instagram

Instagram was founded by Kevin Systrom and Mike Krieger in October 2010, being the
first photo-based social platform. Instagram was launched via app store and right after
one week of existence it achieved 100 000 followers. When comparing Instagram’s to
other SM platforms growth, such as Twitter and Foursquare, these took respectively two
and one years to achieve the same amount of users. Actually, Instagram reached 1
million users only two months after its launch and nowadays is constantly increasing
(Wersm.com, 2017). And since the app was available for android phones and recently
joined direct messaging, Instagram is growing even more (Wersm.com, 2017).
In addition to that, when Instagram added video sharing services, more than 5 million
videos were shared in 24h, and its use also doubled over the last two years (Smith, 2016).

Additionally, McNely (2012) states that visual-based SM is amidst the fastest-growing

social networking sites, and Instagram is among the increasing growth of these sites.
Also, the most appealing particularity of Instagram is that when its users take photos and
share them with friends, it provides users with the opportunity of applying distinct filters
on their pictures or videos before posting them on the platform (Lee et al., 2015). For
instance, McNely (2012) also states that using Instagram among expert organizations is
noteworthy because it provides a predominantly mobile visual image, which
differentiates qualitatively from professional photography in support of branded
communication.

Instagram enables brands to provide a “behind–the–scenes” look to stakeholders, ending

up by strengthening their relationship with the organization (Conlin et al., 2014; Magrath
& McCormick, 2013) and, consequently, identifying relationship-marketing goals for
fortifying the brand.

Regarding some statistical aspects, the use of Instagram grew significantly in 2014 along
all key demographic groups (Duggan, Ellison, Lampe, Lenhart, & Madden, 2015).
About 50% of Internet users are aged between 18-29 years old (Duggan et al., 2015).
Instagram is the 3rd most popular SM platform amidst college students and its
engagement ratio is greater than those on Facebook and Twitter (Salomon, 2013). Also,
according to Forrester Research (2017), the average engagement rate reported via

22
Instagram is 4.2%, compared with 0.07% on Facebook, which is piquing researchers`
interest.

Moreover, according to the latest statistics conducted by MediaKix.com (2017), this $1

billion app, bought by Facebook in 2012, is increasing its popularity, having achieved
700 million monthly active users since its launch in 2010, overtaking Twitter, where
only 400 million users are active. In addition to this, the number of photos shared per
day on Instagram is 95 million, up from 70 million last year of 2016. Currently more
than 40 billion photos were uploaded on the platform, and the daily number of “likes”
is, on average, 3.5 billion every day (OmnicoreAgency.com, 2017).

To conclude, and from a study conducted by Lee et al. (2015), Instagram users are 2.5
times more willing to click on advertorials than on other SM platforms. The originality
and simplicity of Instagram enabled users to share and recognize each other`s lives
through photos, and also provided celebrities and commercial brands the opportunity to
engage with their consumers.

Figure 2. Number of monthly active Instagram users from January 2013 to April 2017 (in millions)
Source: (statista.com, 2017)

2.2.2 Influencers
Influencers can be characterized as “microcelebrities”. They are a new approach of
online performance that involves people expanding their recognition by using
technologies like social platforms, blogs and videos (Senft, 2008). Also, Gorry &

23
Westbrook (2009) state that influencers represent a sort of autonomous outsider endorser
that shape people attitudes by using SM due their influential energy. Therefore, advances
have been created to distinguish and track the influencers pertinent to a given brand or
association. This strive to identify influencers relies on aspects like number of
“followers”, “likes” or the number of times a post is shared.

In addition, earned endorsements enable customers to benefit since it helps them

internalizing messages, and provides the endorsed product or service with strength. An
example of earned endorsements may be the recommendations of an influencer which
enabled buyers to advocate for their most loved brands (Neilsen, 2013). Additionally,
Hall (2010) adds that influencers carry countless direct friends and followers, but their
real significance lies on the number and relevance of their expanded indirect followers.

On the other hand, Petty and Andrews (2008) discuss that consumers perceive
influencers who receive cash payments to be less credible than those taking free samples
or coupons as compensation. Brands that pay direct-monetary benefits to the influencers
in exchange for a recommendation post are usually perceived as “buying” an article, and
the influencer perceived to “sell” the trust of readers to the company (Fu, 2010; Hsu,
2010). On the other hand, if the influencer provides product samples or discount coupons
as allowance, consumers may consider this as a product trial opportunity and be more
likely to acknowledge this type of activity adequately (Fu, 2010; Hsu, 2010).

Additionally, the appeal of influencers is introduced in such a way that they connect and
engage with their followers giving the idea of a personal and exclusive relation.
Commonly on Instagram, there are influencers who are classified as “lifestyle” who post
content related to their own lives as focal subject, but other influencers post content
associated with different classifications, such as “fashion”, “food” or “parenting”, which
solely focus on a streamlined topic that does not need to personally identify with their
own private lives (Senft, 2008).

Subsequently, influencers are more fascinating than celebrities since Instagram users
perceive them as common people (Danesi, 2008). However, influencers are stimulated
by hidden business interests, and that’s why they put a lot of effort on keeping up
impressions of affection on followers (Abidin & Thompson, 2012). Contrasting with
traditional media, posts published by the influencers are considered more casual, fresh

24
and crude and allow for prompt intuitiveness and reaction from followers. Therefore,
followers can see the interaction with influencers as much more individual, quick and
intimate (Boyd, 2006).

Lastly, through SM platforms, influencers straightforwardly control their self-portrayal

and connections with followers by developing disclosures into the backstage of their
camera and using their individual voice to transmit fellowship (Boyd, 2006; Lövheim,
2010). The amount and wide spread of influencers’ posts amidst followers gives the idea
they are always sharing parts of their private lives, and in order to engage with their
followers, they regularly welcome them to interact with each other, thus creating
“influencer content” through requested feedback (Senft, 2008).

2.2.3 Instagram in a business context

Recently, SM platforms have provided brand managers with distinct characteristics that
allow more innovative and original content strategies. In addition, brand managers can
use SM for further branding goals and customize communication with fans that allows
for engagement opportunities (Meng, Stavros, & Westberg, 2015). Therefore, SM forces
brands and companies to look for recent interactive methods of reaching and engaging
their consumers (Gallaugher & Ransbotham, 2010; Kozinets, de Valck, Wojnicki, &
Wilner, 2010). SM increasing utilization offers brand managers an opportunity for
reaching their target audiences (Meredith, 2012). For instance, organizations can create
a much more interactive relationship with consumers (Papasolomou & Melanthiou,
2012).

Regarding a research conducted by Brandwatch Agency (2016), 49% of brands are on

Instagram and by the end of this year they are predicted to rise to 71%. Also, looking at
the top 100 brands in the world, 90% have an Instagram account. Besides this, almost a
third of Instagram users have already used their mobile to purchase a product online,
making them 70% more willing to purchase a product than non-users (Brandwatch.com,
2016). In addition, the same study shows that the average engagement per post grew by
416%, comparatively to two years ago. Hence, it is important to notice that these
Instagram statistics show how important the use of this trendy platform is for marketers
intending to reach their audience.

25
To conclude, not only does the success of small organizations rely on building
“committed” relationships, and SM platforms facilitate that task (Schaffer, 2013), but
Instagram also gives a step forward on that commitment (Garifova, 2016).

2.2.4 Main brands’ presence on Instagram

Statista.com (2017) reported that the 3 leading global brands rated by number of
Instagram followers which are present on Instagram are firstly, Nike with 69.4 million
followers; following is National Geographic: 69.2 million, and then Victoria’s Secret
with 51.3 million followers.

Figure 3. 15th leading brands ranked by number of Instagram followers (in millions)
Source: (statista.com, 2017)

Again, Instagram reported 700 million monthly active users, becoming one of the most
popular social networks worldwide. For instance, the following of brands and celebrities
is considered one of the most attractive Instagram activities, turning this platform a
highly important marketing channel.
According to Hutchinson (2017), 70% of the campaigns performed on Instagram
generated a significant boost for online conversion. In addition, 50% of Instagram users

26
follow at least one business, and almost 500 000 advertisers are increasing their
businesses on Instagram.

Finally, Instagram prospects to generate in mobile advertising sales this year about $1.5
billion and in 2018 about $5 billion (Aslam, 2017).

2.3 The role of credibility to explain the interaction with influencers and the
impact on purchase intention

2.3.1 Definition of credibility

The perceived credibility of an influencer refers to whether an individual perceives the
influencers’ recommendations as unbiased, believable, true, or factual (Hass, 1981).

Perceived credibility of an influencer explains that the effectiveness of a message

depends on perceived level of expertise and trustworthiness of an influencer (Hovland
et al., 1953; Hovland and Weiss, 1951; Ohanian, 1990). Information from a credible
source can influence believes, opinions, attitudes and/or behaviors through a process
called “internalization”, which occurs when receivers embrace the source influence in
terms of their personal attitude and value structures (Erdoğan, 1999: 297). Ohanian
(1990) referred that "source credibility" is often used to pick attention to the influencer’s
positive characteristics that influences the consumer’s acceptance of a message. Because
the influencer is the principal source of information, his perceived credibility is an
important apect for the advertiser (Friedman et al., 1978).

The interpretation of credibility diverges in the related literature. For example, according
to Hovland et al. (1953, p. 21) credibility consists of two components called perceived
expertness and trustworthiness. Trust is a relevant element in several studies (Bowers
and Phillips, 1967; Whitehead, 1968; Applbaum and Anatol, 1972; 1973). Further,
Applbaum & Anatol (1972) and DeSarbo & Harshman (1985) consider that besides trust,
expertise is also a crucial factor of perceived credibility of an influencer. In more recent
studies the attractiveness of an influencer is also considered as a dimension of credibility
(Ohanian, 1990; 1991; Goldsmith et al., 2000).

To conclude, Ohanian (1990) developed three constructs to measure the effectiveness of

influencers through looking at the perceived expertise, trustworthiness and attractiveness

27
of the influencer, specifically in the advertisement course. Subsequently, fifteen items
of perceived credibility of an influencer have been extensively accepted, and used by
several researchers (Pornpitakpan, 2003; Till and Busler, 1998; 2000). Therefore, in this
study, the perceived credibility of an influencer is measured in three dimensions, which
are composed of influencers’ perceived attractiveness, trustworthiness and expertise, as
proposed by Ohanian (1990).

2.3.2 Attractiveness
According to Erdogan (1999: 299), attractiveness is the “stereotype of positive
associations to a person and not only entails physical attractiveness but also other
characteristics such as personality and athletic ability”. Joseph (1982) provided some
evidence regarding physically attractive influencers’ impact on different dependent
measures, and declared that attractive influencers are mostly believed, liked and
preferred to have a positive impact on products than unattractive influencers. Influencers
“who are perceived to be attractive are more likely to lead the purchase intent” (van der
Waldt et al., 2009: 104). Attractiveness is also considered a crucial factor for developing
effective messages (Schlecht, 2003). Attractive influencers usually have more influence
over consumers than less attractive ones (Kahle and Homer, 1985; Joseph, 1982).
However, Baker and Churchill (1977) reported that although attractiveness positively
affects evaluations, it is meaningless in affecting purchasing intentions. While
advertisers have regularly chosen influencers based on their physical attractiveness in
order to affect consumer attitudes (Chaiken, 1979), many researchers (Joseph, 1982;
Kahle and Homer, 1985) admit that influencers’ attractiveness may only be siginficant
if the product enhances the attractiveness of the user. Briefly, the attractiveness of an
influencer is considered, when Instagram users perceive them as elegant, classy,
attractive, beautiful or sexy (Ohanian, 1990).

2.3.3 Trustworthiness
The trust paradigm in communication is the listener’s level of confidence in, and level
of acceptance of the influencer and the message (Abdulmajid-Sallam and Wahid, 2012).
Ohanian (1990) stated that the trustworthy influencer was more persuasive, whether an
expert or not. Trustworthiness can be defined as “the honesty, integrity and believability
the endorser possesses” (van der Waldt et al., 2009: 104). Tustworthiness is also defined
as the degree of confidence that consumers place on influencers’ intent to convey the
assertions they consider most valid (Ohanian, 1990). Much literature executed supports

28
the positive impact of trustworthiness on effectiveness (Chao et al., 2005). To conclude,
the trustworthiness of an influencer is considered when Instagram users perceive them
as dependable, honest, reliable, sincere or trustworthy (Ohanian, 1990).

2.3.4 Expertise
Expertise is presented as "authoritativeness" (McCroskey, 1966), "competence"
(Whitehead, 1968), "expertness" (Applbaum and Anatol, 1972), or "qualification"
(Berlo et al., 1969). Expertise is also defined as “the degree to which the endorser is
perceived to have the adequate knowledge, experience or skills to promote the product”
(van der Waldt et al., 2009: 104). The expertise of the endorser is not important unless
consumers perceive it to be so (Erdogan, 1999: 298). Expertise is accepted as the most
important component for endorsement to be successful, as Daneshvary and Schwer
(2000: 104) indicated. Influencers might be perceived as having more expertise than
created spokespersons (van der Waldt et al., 2009: 104). Influencers’ expertise is “the
extent to which a communicator is perceived to be a source of valid assertions”
(Erdogan, 1999: 298). To sum up, the expertise of an influencer is considered when
Instagram users perceive them as expert, experienced, knowledgeable, qualified or
skilled (Ohanian, 1990).

2.4 Purchase intention

SM has changed the communication landscape and has essentially effected
marketing communication. The increasing relevance of apps like Instagram, Facebook,
Youtube and others in consumers’ lives show a growing influence on their
communication habits.
Since consumers spend much time on SM, an expanding share of communication arises
among these new social networks (Hautz et al., 2013). In what concerns marketing
communication, many brand related interactions and publicity to campaigns increasingly
occur amidst SM networking sites. The development of communication has transformed
consumers from being passive participants in marketing allowing them to be active
creators and influencers (Kozinets et al., 2008, Merz et al., 2009), but also, it has
provided more power over brands straightforwardly to the consumer (Constantinides and
Fountain, 2008).

29
According to Hinz et al. (2011) this recent marketing communication reality offers new
challenges and opportunities to companies, as purchase decisions are significantly
influenced by SM interactions.

Nowadays, consumers usually log on to SM in order to look for product information and
prior influencers’ feedback previously deciding to purchase, as they rely more on the
content generated by other users, especially on Instagram (Brown et al., 2003, Horst et
al., 2007; Harris, 2012; Racherla & Friske, 2012). Authors like Bahtar & Muda (2016)
have also stated that this happens regularly, because several product-related photos and
videos can be found on Instagram.

Purchase intention, is therefore, a relevant indicator of an actual purchase and is used to

measure consumers’ actions (Kim et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2015; Pavlou, 2003). In
addition, purchase intention can also be considered a consumer’s goal intention toward
a product (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). Spears & Singh (2004) define it as a consumer’s
conscious plan or intention to make an effort in order to purchase a product.

Moreover, purchase intention is considered to be “the mental stage” in the development

of a decision where the consumer has built up a genuine willingness to perform toward
a product (Wells et al., 2011; Dodds et al., 1991).

To conclude, since the advertisers’ main objective is getting consumers to form an

intention to purchase the product advertised by the influencers to attract and retain
its customers (Ko, Kim, and Zhang, 2008), it is relevant to study if the perceptions of
credibility of an influencer influence consumers’ purchase intentions (Erdogan, 1999;
Ohanian, 1991; van der Waldt et al., 2009).
Therefore, regarding the study conducted by Dodds et al. (1991), Instagram users’
purchase intentions occur as follows: when Instagram users pretend to buy the product;
or when they are likely that they will buy the product; or when they are willing to buy
the product that influencers are promoting on Instagram.

Following this rationale, the subsequent research questions are put forward:

RSQ1_A – Does perceived credibility of an influencer on Instagram influence purchase

intention of the products promoted by the influencer?

30
RSQ1_B – If yes, which dimensions of credibility - attractiveness, trustworthiness and
expertise - better help to explain purchase intention of the products promoted by the
influencer?

2.5 Gender
Several prior researchers have attempted to depict the main similarities and differences
among genders (Deaux & Kite, 1987). In advertising, these differences are very relevant
since gender has commonly been used as a basis for market segmentation. Nowadays,
gender remains frequently applied to implement segmentation strategies (Meyers-Levy
& Sternthal, 1991).

Advertisers have the need to acknowledge how online consumers perceive credibility.
Ferebee (2008) advocates that since advertisers target ads to specific demographics, any
difference in how male and female perceive the credibility of an influencer is important
to take into account. Flanagan and Metzger (2003) suggest that male rate perceived
credibility of an influencer significantly higher than female, which means that female
and male consumers have different perceptions of perceived credibility of an influencer.
Consequently, it appears to be likely that gender may assume an important role in
determining the differences that are perceived by female and male Instagram users of an
influencer’s credibility.

In addition, Garbarino and Strahilevitz (2004) found that females usually perceive a
higher risk level in purchase products online than males. This phenomenon suggests for
instance that intrinsic gender differences may contribute to the moderating role for
purchase intentions (Holbrook, 1986; Palmer and Bejou, 1995). Accordingly, female
consumers are more sensitive to relevant information posted online than male when
making judgments, causing subsequent purchase intentions done by male and female
consumers to differ (Meyers-Levy and Sternthal, 1991). Additionally, Omnicore.com
(2017) states that 68% of Instagram users all over the world are female and 32% are
male.

Following this rationale, the aim of this study is to explore if there are differences among
gender, concerning Instagram users’ perceived credibility of an influencer and the
purchase intentions of the products promoted by the influencer, in order to help

31
advertisers better comprehend the differences between female and male Instagram users,
as to produce effective promotions for each segment, and target their audiences.

Therefore, the subsequent research questions were put forward:

RSQ2_A – Are there any differences on perceived credibility of an influencer and on

purchase intention of the products promoted by the influencer concerning gender -
related characteristics?

RSQ2_B – If yes, which are the main dimensions of credibility that better help to explain
the purchase intention of the products promoted by the influencer of each gender?

2.6 Conclusion and conceptual framework

The goal of the present study is to explore the impact that the perceived credibility of an
influencer, on Instagram, has on purchase intention, and understand what are the
differences in this impact considering gender-related characteristics of Instagram users.
Figure 4 schematizes the conceptual framework developed.

Figure 4. Conceptual Framework

Therefore, the subsequent research questions were put forward, namely:

32
RSQ1_A – Does perceived credibility of an influencer on Instagram influence purchase
intention of the products promoted by the influencer?

RSQ1_B – If yes, which dimensions of credibility – attractiveness, trustworthiness and

expertise – better help to explain purchase intention of the products promoted by the
influencer?

RSQ2_A – Are there any differences on perceived credibility of an influencer and on

purchase intention of the products promoted by the influencer concerning gender -
related characteristics?

RSQ2_B – If yes, which are the main dimensions of credibility that better help to explain
the purchase intention of the products promoted by the influencer of each gender?

33
Chapter 3. Methodology

3.1 Research approach

According to Saunders et al. (2009) there are three types of research approach when
conducting researches; namely, the exploratory, the descriptive and the explanatory
research.

Exploratory research is used to investigate a problem, which has not yet been studied
in-depth. For this approach the researchers identify and generally describe a new
problem statement by analyzing primary data, frequently collected through qualitative
research, such as interviews and focus groups (Saunders et. al, 2009).
Descriptive research focuses on providing a detailed point of view of an issue or theory
that has been analyzed already in the past, allowing for theory building by doing
empirical generalizations of the relation between variables. In contrast, to the
exploratory research, this research is supported on secondary data collected through
quantitative research. Explanatory research aims to establish a causal relationship
between variables. Researchers use it to test the causal relationships underlying a given
problem. This approach is used when theoretical insights exist, so that hypotheses are
formulated and tested through quantitative research and primary data collection.

This dissertation aims to explore how purchase intention relates with Instagram users’
perceived credibility of an influencer. In other words, understanding if and how the
credibility of an influencer perceived by the Instagram users varies across different levels
of purchase intention. To do so, all constructs involved are firstly researched and
described, based on secondary data coming from existing research. This is followed by
the collection of primary data, achieved with resource to a questionnaire in which
respondents are assessed on their levels of credibility to follow an influencer on
Instagram and its impact on purchase intention.

In this dissertation, an exploratory research (since the impact of digital influencers on

Instagram users has not yet been studied in-depth) and descriptive research (since it is
based on quantitative research) approach was undertaken, by analyzing the major
credibility and purchase intention dimensions of the studied sample. The present study
is therefore quantitative.

34
3.2 Research instruments

3.2.1 Population and sample

Population, as defined by Malhotra (2006), is the collection of elements or objects that
possess the information sought by the researcher, and about which inferences are to be
made. This way, four dimensions are used to define population: its elements (object
about which or from which the information is desired), sampling units (unit containing
the element, that is available for selection at some stage of the sampling process), extent
(refers to the geographical boundaries) and time (is the time period under consideration).
For this dissertation, population is composed by Portuguese individuals aged 18 years
old or over, that have an account on Instagram, considering only those that are active
Instagram users and follow one or more Influencers on this social media platform.

The present study uses a non-probabilistic convenience sample. According to Malhotra

(2006), a convenience sample is of non-probabilistic nature, as the questionnaire was
distributed among friends, family and colleagues. The convenience sampling technique
is a non-probabilistic technique that seeks to obtain a sample of convenient elements,
where the selection of sampling units is left to the researcher. The author highlights the
least expensive, the least time-consuming and the most convenient as the main strengths
of this sampling technique.

3.2.2 The survey

This research used a structured and self-administered survey, which was built and
distributed online, considering the information needs and the data collection method
chosen.

Moreover, it is possible through online surveys to build a proper questionnaire with

several format and design questions. While addressing the questionnaire,
recommendations by the authors Malhotra’s (1999) and DeVellis’ (1991) were followed
to guarantee that the questions were as simple and clear as possible, to keep wording
appropriate and also not too extensive in order to prevent that different meanings could
create some confusion among respondents, resulting in incorrect answers.

The first part of the questionnaire is meant to measure the filters needed to consider that
survey response valid, followed by Instagram users’ perceived credibility to follow
influencers. Afterwards, it is meant to measure the impact that perceived credibility of

35
an influencer has on purchase intention, proceeded by extra questions. The final part of
the questionnaire consisted of socio-demographic characterization data. Lastly, the
questionnaire was subjected to a pre-test before the launch. This pre-test was answered
by 21 participants and the main findings were that the measurement model had good
internal consistency and proved to be adequate for the study.

3.2.3 The measures

To operationalize the impact of Instagram users’ perceived credibility to follow
influencers on purchase intention, the measures were adapted from previous studies. The
credibility scale was measured by 15 items adapted from the Ohanian (1990) study, and
purchase intention scale was measured by 3 items adapted from Dodds, Monroe &
Grewal (1991) research.

In this questionnaire, Likert Scale was mostly used, with the intention of classifying
respondents’ positions on each of the questions. According to Malhotra (2006) this scale
is widely used and requires respondents to indicate a degree of agreement and
disagreement with each of statements. All items were measured on a 7-point Likert
Scale, where 1 represents “strongly disagree” and 7 represents “strongly agree”.

Moreover, the English questionnaire was translated into Portuguese and developed into
Qualtrics (www.qualtrics.com).

36
Chapter 4. Results analysis
4.1 Preliminary analysis

4.1.1 Data collection and analysis

Responses from the online survey were collected between March 11 and April 5 .
The survey was promoted through email and social media platfoms. The data collected
was analyzed through the statistical program IBM SPSS Statistics. Finally, the
questionnaire was answered by 491 respondents. After removing participants with
missing answers, the sample counts 285 valid-responses.

4.1.2 Sample characterization

Demographic characteristics:

As far as gender is concerned, 53% of the total sample consisted of female participants
and 47% of male. Results are presented on Figure 5.

47%
53% Female
Male

Figure 5. Gender distribution.

Regarding the age distribution of the sample, there was a clear majority of young adults
between the ages of 18 and 24 years old that represent 75% of the sample; followed by
respondents between 25 and 34 years old, 22%. Results presented on Figure 6.

37
 75%

22%

2% 1%

18 - 24 25 - 34 35 - 44 > 44

Figure 6. Age distribution.

In terms of occupation, it is possible to conclude that majority of the respondents are

students, representing 47% of the sample, followed by participants that are employed by
third parties with 25%. Moreover, 16% of the respondents are working students, 7% are
self-employed, 3% of them are unemployed and 2% have other occupations. Results on
Figure 7.

Other 2%

Re red 0%

Student-worker 16%

Unemployed 3%

Self-employed 7%

Employed by third par es 25%

Student 47%

Figure 7. Occupation distribution.

Regarding the education level, the analysis of the total sample`s results show that 58%
of the participants have a bachelor degree, whereas 23% of them have a master degree.
Moreover, 18% of the respondents are high school graduated and only 1% have a PhD.

38
Results on Figure 8.

PhD 1%

Master Degree 23%

Bachelor Degree 58%

High School (12th grade) 18%

Secondary School (9th grade) 0%

Elementary School (6th grade) 0%

Primary School (4th grade) 0%

Figure 8. Education level distribution.

As far as the monthly net income is concerned, the most common value is equivalent to
0 – 500€, 50% of the sample. Next, 25% of the respondents claim a value between 500€
– 1000€; following, 17% state that they receive more, namely from 1000€ – 2500€;
afterwards, 4% report a value between 2500€ – 3500€ and lastly, and the remaining 4%
mentioned to receive more than 3500€. Results on Figure 9.

50%

25%

17%

4% 4%

0 - 500€ 500€ - 1000€ 1000€ - 2500€ 2500€ - 3500€ > 3500€

Figure 9. Monthly net income distribution.

39
Additionally, extra questions were analyzed to add up some relevant insights regarding
each gender and respective behavior on SM platforms. Questions and results can be
found on Appendix 5.

4.1.3 Data screening – univariate and multivariate outliers

In order to improve the quality of the data, a data cleaning process was executed, which
involves an outlier analysis for univariate and multivariate outliers.

The univariate analysis allows to identify cases of extreme values, which means, values
that are not common among the sample for the 18 items of the data set. In order to
identify the presence of univariate outliers in the single variables, all scores of each
variable had to be converted into standardized Z-scores. For a significant level of 5%,
Z-scores that are greater than 3.29 and smaller than -3.29 are considered as outliers.
Consequently, through this analysis, no univariate outliers were found.

The multivariate analysis allows to identify cases of respondents with an uncommon

combination of values in two or more variables. In order to perform this analysis, the
Mahalanobis Distance for each response using the linear regression for the 4 different
variables was calculated. Afterwards, a chi-square distribution was also performed.
Then, the aim was to identify the Mahalanobis Distance probability with a p-value lower
than 0.001. After analyzing this, 19 outliers were identified.

4.1.4 Data reliability

The Cronbach`s alpha for both scales was assessed in order to analyze the internal
consistency of the measurement model, presented on Table 1.

Table 1. Scales` reliability test analysis

Initial Cronbach`s Final

Cronbach`s Item
Scales Dimensions Number of α if item Number of
α deleted
Items deleted Items
Attractiveness 5 0.875 - - 5

Credibility Trustworthiness 5 0.914 - - 5

Expertise 5 0.870 - - 5

Credibility as a construct 15 0.869 - - 15

Purchase intention as a
3 0.898 - - 3
construct

40
Per DeVellis (1991), Cronbach`s alpha coefficient values below 0.60 are considered
unacceptable, whereas between 0.65 and 0.70 are minimally acceptable, the author
considers that between 0.70 and 0.80, Cronbach’s alpha values are considered as good
and between 0.80 and 0.90 are considered as very good.

Therefore, as it can be observed on Table 1, all dimensions of the credibility scale

obtained a Cronbach`s alpha equal or greater than 0.870, which reveals a high level of
internal consistency of the scales. It is also possible to observe that both constructs -
credibility and purchase intention - revealed high values of Cronbach’s alpha: 0.869 for
credibility and 0.898 for purchase intention. To conclude, all scales are considered as
having very good reliability according to DeVills (1991).

Finally, the column labelled “Cronbach`s alpha if item deleted” reflects the change in
Cronbach’s alpha that would be seen if that particular item were deleted, in order to
make that scale more reliable, which is not the case due to the present results.

Appendix 5 summarizes each variable computed, including their respective means and
Cronbach`s alpha to measure their reliability.

4.1.5 Principal component analysis (PCA)

A principal component analysis (PCA) is performed with the purpose of assessing the
dimensionality of the scales used and to verify if all factors are aggregated around the
component they are supposed to measure.

Before running the PCA, sample size is a concern. Comrey and Lee (1992) define the
efficiency of samples according to their sample size, whereas a sample size of 100 people
is considered poor, 200 is fair, 300 is good, 500 is very good and lastly, 1000 is
considered to be excellent. Regarding the principal component analysis, Hair et al.
(2005), recommend a sample size superior to 200 participants. In this case, it is possible
to conclude that the sample used is adequate for factor analysis, since 285 respondents
compose it.

To get these variables as different from each other, a Varimax Rotation method was run
as it helps to interpret the factors by putting each dimension primarily on one of the
factors. The results demonstrated that with the presence of these 4 components/factors,
73% of the total variance is explained. Also, the initial number of factors is the same as

41
the number of variables used in the factor analysis. Thus, all the items are aggregated
around the factor that they are supposed to measure, as it can be observed in Appendix
4.

Regarding the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO), values can

vary between 0 and 1. When its value is 0 it means that the summation of partial
correlations is relative large to the summation of the correlations. On the other hand, if
the KMO value is close to 1 it means that the patterns of correlations are compact, thus
the factor analysis will yield reliable factors. According to Kaiser (1974), KMO values
are accepted above 0.5. Hutcheson and Sofroniou (1999) proposed that KMO values
between 0.5 and 0.7 are considered normal, values between 0.7 and 0.8 are good, values
between 0.8 and 0.9 are great and lastly, values above 0.9 are superb. Therefore, the
results showed a high value of 0.859, revealing a great adequacy of the sample.

In addition, it is important that Bartlett’s test of sphericity reaches a significance value

to support the factorability of the correlation matrix given. In this scenario, the Bartlett’s
test of sphericity value is considered significant, given a value lower than the p-value of
0.05.

Therefore, based on this analysis, it is possible to conclude that both constructs that are
studied in this research, credibility and purchase intention, definitely are measuring
different things, both adding value to the analysis, with a significance value of p < 0.001,
which proves that the factorability of the correlation matrix is appropriate. The
approximated chi-square value is 3293.527. Additional details regarding the KMO and
PCA`s results are provided in Appendix 4.

4.1.6 Correlation analysis

A Pearson correlation is a measure to verify the strength and direction of association,
positive or negative, of the relationship between two variables. Following this reasoning,
the Pearson correlation test was run to determine the relationship between credibility and
purchase intention.

Pearson correlation was assessed to explore the correlation between all variables to
understand if there is indeed an association between purchase intention and the
credibility dimensions. The overall analysis indicates that all the correlations are positive
and significant except for trustworthiness and attractiveness. Most of the variables show

42
to be correlated with significance at the 0.01 level. As for purchase intention it shows
strong correlations with the 3 credibility variables, all of them at the 0.01 level, except
for expertise.

The strongest relationship with purchase intention happens with trustworthiness, with a
moderate positive correlation of 0.384, which is considerably above the other two
significant relationships. The second stronger correlation is the one with attractiveness
(0.268) followed by Expertise (0.195), as it can be observed in Table 2.

Table 2. Pearson correlation`s analysis

Scales Attractiveness Trustworthiness Expertise Purchase intention

Attractiveness 1 0.111 0.139* 0.268**

Trustworthiness 0.111 1 0.543** 0.384**

Pearson correlation
Expertise 0.139* 0.543** 1 0.195*

Purchase intention 0.268** 0.384** 0.195* 1

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

4.1.7 Descriptive statistics

All the 3 means (attractiveness, trustworthiness and expertise) to measure Instagram
users perceived credibility to interact influencers on Instagram fall between 3.67 and
5.36, which can be observed in Appendix 5. The mean for the overall level of credibility
is 4.47. The strongest Instagram users perceived credibility of an influencer among the
3 is attractiveness, the second is expertise, and trustworthiness is in general the weakest
perceived credibility for the respondents to interact with influencers on Instagram.

As for the 2 constructs which were measured as the core of the survey, when it comes to
purchase intention the means of the 3 items are set between 3.38 and 3.78, on a scale
from 1 to 7. The overall mean for purchase intention in the sample is 3.64, what
corresponds to a relatively medium average value of purchase intention. The respondents
present a higher level of agreement when they pretend to buy the product promoted by
the influencers, once it is the item with the highest mean, as it can be observed in
Appendix 5.

43
4.2 In-depth analysis
Throughout this subchapter, the research questions previously formulated were
answered through the analysis of results of the data collected.

4.2.1 Research questions

RSQ1_A – Does perceived credibility of an influencer on Instagram influences purchase
intention of the products promoted by the influencer?

In order to analyze whether perceived credibility of an influencer influences Instagram

users` purchase intentions, a linear regression was performed, as it can be seen in Table
3.

Table 3. Linear regression – credibility and purchase intention

Dependent Variable: Purchase Intention

Independent Standardized
τ p
Variable β
Constant - 1.597 0.111

Credibility 0.397 7.260 0.000

F 52.713

R² 0.158

The results of this test demonstrate that this causality is verified and that the model used
is statistically significant, due to its F value, F (1,281) = 52.713 and significance value
( = 0.000), since < 0.05, it is statistically significant.

result reveals that 16% of Instagram users` purchase intention is explained by

perceived credibility about influencers.

Therefore, perceived credibility of an influencer has a significant and positive

standardized coefficient, ( = 0.397; = 0.000), which confirms that there is a positive
and significant relation between perceived credibility of an influencer and purchase
intention.

RSQ1_B – If yes, which dimensions of credibility - attractiveness, trustworthiness and

expertise - better help to explain purchase intention of the products promoted by the

44
influencer?

A deeper analysis of this causality consists on exploring which perceived credibility of

an influencer better explain Instagram users` purchase intention of the products
promoted by the influencer. For this purpose a multiple linear regression was undertaken
and every dimension of credibility was considered as independent variable, as it can be
observed on Table 4.

Table 4. Multiple linear regression – attractiveness, trustworthiness, expertise and

purchase intention

Dependent Variable: Purchase Intention

Independent Standardized
τ p
Variable β

Constant - 1.709 0.088

Attractiveness 0.235 4.352 0.000

Trustworthiness 0.387 6.056 0.000

Expertise (-)0.049 (-)0.766 0.444

p 0.000

F 23.561

R² 0.202

The demonstrates the percentage of the variable variance that is explained by the
model, consequently 20% of Instagram users` purchase intentions are explained by these
dimensions. In addition to that the test is statistically significant as it has a p-value ( =
0.000) and F value, F (3, 279) = 23.561.

Regarding the three credibility dimensions, two of them are statistically significant for a
confidence level of 5% and positively affect the most purchase intention. Taking into
account its p-values and betas, these dimensions are attractiveness ( = 0.235; =
0.000) and trustworthiness ( = 0.387; = 0.000). These results answer to research
question 2, since they are all statistically significant, considering that < 0.05.

The same is not verified with expertise dimension since it has no statistically
significance, because > 0.05 and beta demonstrates a negative effect, ( = -0.049; =
0.444).

Following this, the stronger dimension of the perceived credibility to follow an

45
influencer on Instagram explaining Instagram users` purchase intention is
trustworthiness since its beta is the higher one ( = 0.387), followed by attractiveness
( = 0.235). Since all betas present values above 0, the influence of these two credibility
dimensions towards purchase intention is very positive.

To conclude, the answer to the research question 2 is: trustworthiness, followed by

attractiveness are the perceived credibility dimensions that better help to explain the
Instagram users` Purchase Intention of the products promoted by the influencers.

RSQ2_A – Are there any differences on perceived credibility of an influencer and on

purchase intention of the products promoted by the influencer concerning gender -
related characteristics?

In order to understand if there are significant differences between male and female
participants on the perceived credibility of an influencer and on purchase intention of
the products promoted by these influencers, a Chi-square test was performed, as it can
be seen from Tables 5 to 8.

Table 5. Chi-square test – gender and attractiveness

Attractiveness dimension (Ohanian, 1990)

Chi-Square Tests
Asymptotic ρ
Value df
(2-sided)
Pearson χ² 48.152 26 0.005
Symmetric Measures
Approximate
Value
ρ
Phi 0.415 0.005
Nominal by Nominal
Cramer`s V 0.415 0.005

Table 6. Chi-square test – gender and trustworthiness

Trustworthiness dimension (Ohanian, 1990)

Chi-Square Tests
Asymptotic ρ
Value df
(2-sided)
Pearson χ² 31.917 28 0.278
Symmetric Measures
Approximate
Value
ρ
Phi 0.338 0.278
Nominal by Nominal
Cramer`s V 0.338 0.278

46
 Table 7. Chi-square test – gender and expertise

Expertise dimension (Ohanian, 1990)

Chi-Square Tests
Asymptotic ρ
Value df
(2-sided)
Pearson χ² 30.784 27 0.280
Symmetric Measures
Approximate
Value
ρ
Phi 0.332 0.280
Nominal by Nominal
Cramer`s V 0.332 0.280

Table 8. Chi-square test – gender and purchase intention

Purchase intention (Dodds, Monroe & Grewal, 1991)

Chi-Square Tests
Asymptotic ρ
Value df
(2-sided)
Pearson χ² 39.455 17 0.002
Symmetric Measures
Approximate
Value
ρ
Phi 0.375 0.002
Nominal by Nominal
Cramer`s V 0.375 0.002

Regarding the significance test for attractiveness dimension and gender, ( (26) =
48.152, p = 0.005), it is possible to conclude that these variables are not independent of
each other, concluding that there are statistically significant differences between female
and male Instagram users and their perceived attractiveness of an influencer.

The same is not verified with trustworthiness, ( (28) = 31.917; p = 0.278), and
expertise dimensions, ( (27) = 30.784; p = 0.280), since both present p > 0.05,
meaning that they are independent from each other. So, there is not a statistically
significant relationship between perceived trustworthiness and gender, as well, between
perceived expertise of an influencer and gender.

Finally, the significance test for purchase intention and gender ( (17) = 39.455, p =
0.002) evidences that there are statistically significant differences between female and
male Instagram users on their purchase intentions of the products promoted by the
influencer.

47
Moreover, Phi and Cramer`s V tests regard the strength of association between the
variables, and if it is “0” there is no relationship between the variables; if is from 0 to
0.2 there is a weak relationship; if it is from 0.2 and 0.3 there is a moderate relationship;
and if it is higher than 0.3 there is a strong relationship. In this case, all the dimensions
have a strong relationship with gender, especially attractiveness and purchase intention,
which are the ones that have higher values of association. However, only attractiveness
and purchase intention dimensions present a statistically significant relationship with
gender since its p < 0.05.

To conclude, there are statistically significant differences among female and male
Instagram users on the perceived credibility of an influencer, namely on the perceived
attractiveness of an influencer, but also, on the purchase intention of the products
promoted by the influencer.

RSQ2_B – If yes, which are the main dimensions of credibility that better help to explain
the purchase intention of the products promoted by the influencer of each gender?

With the purpose of understanding, which perceived credibility of an influencer mostly

contribute to explain purchase intention among female and male Instagram users, a
multiple regression was performed. Once again, the sample was split into the different
gender-related characteristics to easily understand the results.

Table 9. Female – multiple linear regression – attractiveness, trustworthiness,

expertise and purchase intention

Independent Standardized
τ p
Variable β

Constant - 1.992 0.048

Attractiveness 0.246 3.300 0.001

Trustworthiness 0.434 4.305 0.000

Expertise (-)0.126 (-)1.258 0.211

p 0.000

F 12.791

R² 0.210

Concerning female Instagram users, the demonstrates the percentage of the variable

48
variance that is explained by the model. It shows that 21% of female Instagram users`
purchase intentions are explained by the independent variables: attractiveness,
trustworthiness and expertise dimensions. In addition to that, the overall model is
statistically significant as it has a p-value ( = 0.000) and F value, F (3, 144) = 12.791,
concluding that there is a linear relationship between the variables.

Results also show that two independent variables were found to have a significant and
positive effect, since β > 0 and p < 0.05, on female Instagram users` purchase intentions:
attractiveness (β = 0.246; p = 0.001) and trustworthiness (β = 0.434; p = 0.000). The
same is not verified with expertise dimension since it does not have a significant effect
on female Instagram users` purchase intentions, because the p-value is > 0,05 and beta
demonstrates a negative impact ( = -0.126; = 0.211).

Following this, the stronger dimension of perceived credibility to follow an influencer

on Instagram explaining female Instagram users` purchase intentions is trustworthiness
since its beta is the higher one ( = 0.434), followed by attractiveness ( = 0.246).

To conclude, the perceived trustworthiness and attractiveness of an influencer are the

credibility dimensions that better help to explain female Instagram users` purchase
intention of the products promoted by the influencers. In fact, the expertise dimension
does not significantly explain female Instagram users` purchase intention.

Table 10. Male – multiple linear regression – attractiveness, trustworthiness, expertise

and purchase intention

Independent Standardized
τ p
Variable β

Constant - 0.710 0.479

Attractiveness 0.205 2.515 0.013

Trustworthiness 0.321 3.579 0.000

Expertise 0.045 0.498 0.619

p 0.000

F 9.016

R² 0.174

Concerning male Instagram users, it shows that 17% of male Instagram users` purchase

49
intentions are explained by the independent variables: attractiveness, trustworthiness and
expertise dimensions, which is lower when compared to female. In addition, the overall
model is statistically significant, ( = 0.000) and F value, F (3, 128) = 9.016, concluding
that there is a linear relationship between the variables.

Results show that two independent variables were found to have a significant and
positive effect, on male Instagram users` purchase intentions: attractiveness (β = 0.205;
p = 0.013) and trustworthiness (β = 0.321; p = 0.000). Nevertheless, expertise dimension
still doesn`t have a significant effect on male Instagram users` purchase intention,
because p-value is > 0.05 (β = 0.045; = 0.619).

Following this, the stronger dimension of perceived credibility to follow an influencer

on Instagram explaining male Instagram users` purchase intention is still trustworthiness
( = 0.321), followed by Attractiveness ( = 0.205).

To conclude, trustworthiness and attractiveness are the credibility dimensions that better
help to explain the male Instagram users` purchase intentions of the products promoted
by the influencers. However, it is perceptible that the perceived trustworthiness of an
influencer has much more impact on female Instagram users` purchase intentions than
on male.

50
Chapter 5. Conclusions

5.1 Academic contributions

The conceptual framework here developed highlights that the constructs used in this
research, to measure Instagram users’ perceived credibility of an influencer and
Instagram users’ purchase intention, present a good reliability, since Cronbach’s α of all
measures admit great values. As a result, taking into account that the present research
acknowledges good levels of internal consistency, it proves that this framework is
competent to measure the constructs within the study, and consequently to analyze the
systematized research questions. Moreover, results demonstrate that Instagram users’
perceived credibility of an influencer is an antecedent of purchase intention, since both
constructs are greatly combined.

Although there are some studies already concerned with perceived credibility of
endorsers or celebrities (Hovland et al., 1953; Hovland & Weiss, 1951; Ohanian, 1990),
and several studies related to purchase intention (Kim et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2015;
Pavlou, 2003; Dodds et al., 1991) and, consequently, some studies that regard this
relationship between perceived credibility and purchase intention, (Jeng, 2016; Lafferty
& Goldsmith, 1999; Lee & Koo, 2015; Guido et al., 2011; Tsai et al., 2010), to the best
of our knowledge no other studies were made or applied specifically to a social media
platform, namely Instagram, focusing deeply on the behavior of Portuguese Instagram
users, ending up exploring their perceived credibility on influencers and the impact these
influencers have on the purchase intentions of said Instagram users.

Regarding the first research question, as studied previously (Sertoglu, Catli & Korkmaz,
2014), this research proves that the relation between Instagram users’ perceived
credibility of an influencer and their purchase intention is verified and positive, which
predicts that higher levels of credibility develop higher levels of purchase intention.

In addition to that, it was expected from previous research that attractiveness,

trustworthiness and expertise, as credibility dimensions, explained purchase intention
(Sertoglu, Catli & Korkmaz, 2014; Ohanian, 1990).

But, as explored on the second research question, regarding which Instagram users’
perceived credibility dimensions better help to explain the purchase intention of the

51
products promoted by the influencers, the findings exposed that these are trustworthiness
and attractiveness, excluding expertise, meaning that the perceived expertise of an
influencer does not affect the purchase intentions of Instagram users.

In respect to the third research question, according to what was expected based on past
literature (Ferebee, 2008; Flanagan and Metzger, 2003), female and male Instagram
users can be considered significantly different among their perceived credibility to
interact with influencers. To better understand this, on the fourth research question it is
estimated which perceived credibility of an influencer better helps to explain female and
male Instagram users’ purchase intention. Hence, it is conclusive that females were
found to be more influenced by the perceived trustworthiness of an influencer than
males.

Finally, since SM is considered an efficient marketing tool (Bickart and Schindler, 2001;
Kumar and Benbasat, 2006; Zhang et al., 2010) that already engaged daily users
(Ackaradejruangsri, 2015; Phanraphee, 2014), when regardind extra questions, results
also demonstrate that Instagram users are actively online. The research findings show
exactly this phenomenom, reporting that 50% of Instagram users spend more than 1.30h
on Instagram per day, drawing attention to the fact that this question excludes all the
other SM platforms, taking only into consideration the Instagram platform.

5.2 Managerial contributions

The present study contributes for the understanding of Instagram users’ main perceived
credibility dimensions to interact with an influencer on Instagram, and the impact it has
on the purchase intention of the products promoted by these influencers. Afterwards, the
focus is as well in understanding if there are differences on the behaviors of female and
male Instagram users. Exploring this is crucial in boosting effective marketing
campaigns and cultivating personal interactions. Hence, knowing what is the perceived
credibility of an influencer is meaningful, in order that new communication strategies
that are able to satisfy the public may flourish.

Furthermore, the evidence presented in this thesis suggests that trustworthiness is the
main dimension of credibility that explains purchase intention, as proposed by Akar &
Nasir (2015). In other words, Instagram users perceived trustworthiness of an influencer
influences their purchase intentions, and in order to satisfy Instagram users, marketing

52
managers should embrace these influencers on their campaigns.

Additionally, Hovland et al. (1953); Hovland & Weiss (1951) and Ohanian (1991),
pointed out the pertinency of studying perceived credibility in the context of social
media, since it is considered a treasured marketing communication channel, as
information from a credible influencer has the power to influence beliefs, attitudes and
behaviors of Instagram users (Erdoğan, 1999).

Based on the research conducted by Sertoglu, Catli & Korkmaz (2014) it is known that
perceived attractiveness, trustworthiness and expertise affect the perceived credibility of
an influencer, and that the perceived credibility of an influencer in turn affects the
purchase intention of a given brand or product.

Given these facts, managerial competitive advantages can be assured by knowing the
main perceived credibility dimensions of an influencer that influence most Instagram
users, and the impact it causes on the purchase intention of the products promoted by the
influencer. Therefore, findings about the relation between perceived credibility of an
influencer and purchase intention grant a better understanding of both constructs, and
also aim to help advertisers address Instagram users’ needs and interests, and
consequently, achieve higher levels of purchase intention, which is the main goal.

To conclude, advertisers, marketers and marketing managers can benefit with the
suggested evidences that the trustworthiness and attractiveness perceived on an
influencer are the main credibility dimensions that better explain Instagram users’
purchase intention, as previously researched (Hovland et al., 1953; Hovland and Weiss,
1951; Ohanian, 1991). So, and in order to help marketers, they should know that the
perceived trustworthiness of an influencer may be defined as “the honesty, integrity and
believability the endorser possesses” (van der Waldt et al., 2009: 104), and that the
attractiveness perception of an influencer takes place when Instagram users consider the
influencer as “attractive” or “sexy” (Ohanian, 1990).

As a result, brands, marketers, advertisers and marketing managers of a company that

want to use influencers as their endorsers should make sure that these two credibility
dimensions are present and perceived by Instagram users.

Nevertheless, regarding the gender-related differences, and in what concerns the

53
perceived credibility of an influencer, marketers should also take into consideration that
females are more influenced by the perceived trustworthiness of an influencer than
males.

Finally, one of the extra questions placed in this research also hopes to help marketers
to know in which section lie the most preferred influencers, which Instagram user are
more likely to follow on Instagram. Therefore, marketers should know that in Portugal,
Instagram users prefer to follow an influencer that includes content related to
technology, design and the natural world on their Instagram posts.

5.3 Limitations and future research recommendations

This thesis proves results to be useful and reveals a significant move onward in the
research concerning the relationship between Instagram users and their perceived
credibility of an influencer on Instagram, and its impact on purchase intention, as well
as emerging gender-related differences. Nonetheless, there are some limitations.

The major limitation of this study is the sampling procedure in which a non-probabilistic
convenience sample is used, which cannot therefore be considered as a significant
illustrative of the population (Malhotra, 2006). Nevertheless, the possibility of having a
wider and diverse sample could mean results’ reliability being greater.

Moreover, since this study is based on a quantitative research, a more qualitative

component could upgrade its viability on a qualitative approach, strictly speaking, using
focus group’ discussions and via interviewing marketers or brand managers who want
to use Instagram and its influencers as a bridge, to engage consumers to its brands; a
finer understanding over this topic would be feasible.

Nevertheless, Instagram users’ perceived credibility of an Influencer, namely its

perceived attractiveness, trustworthiness and expertise were the dimensions used in this
study to measure the impact on purchase intention. Consequently, it would be wonderful
if future researchers studied which motivations also lead Instagram users to interact with
influencers on Instagram and adapt this research to other trendy social media platforms,
such as Facebook or Blogs. Exploring this knowledge dimension would be a great
contribution for marketers.

54
Lastly, identifying how influencers’ perceived credibility is perceived by consumers and
its impact on purchase intention is of immense relevance and significance for marketers
to build their strategies over the Instagram platform, and again by identifying the
differences among female and male Instagram users, marketers can more efficiently
customize marketing strategies concerning the target they want to reach and also convey
proper and relevant information that takes into consideration gender characteristics.

55
APPEND
ICES

A
ppend
ix1
.Su
rve
y

C
aroP
art
ici
pan
te
,

E
stequ
est
ion
ári
oér
eal
iza
don
oâm
bitod
ate
sep
arac
onc
lus
ãodo M
est
rad
odeG
est
ão
d
aCa
tól
icaL
isb
onS
choo
lofB
usi
nes
san
dEc
onom
ics
,te
ndoc
omoob
jec
tiv
oes
tud
aro
im
pac
to d
osi
nfl
uen
cia
dor
es, ou m
aisc
onh
ecido
spo
rbl
ogg
ers
,nai
nte
nçã
ode
c
omp
ran
ome
rca
dop
ortugu
ês.E
stequ
est
ion
ári
odem
orac
erc
ade5 m
inu
tosas
er
p
ree
nch
ido
.Im
por
tas
al
ien
tarqu
enã
oex
is
temr
espo
sta
sce
rta
soue
rra
daseéa
sse
gur
ado
d
esd
ejáqu
etod
aai
nfo
rma
çãop
res
tad
ase
rác
onf
ide
nci
ale m
ant
idaems
igi
loab
sol
uto
.
M
uitoob
rig
adap
elas
uap
art
ici
paç
ãoec
olab
ora
çãon
est
ees
tud
o.

56
Q1
.
T
emc
ont
anoIn
sta
gram
?
 S
im(1
)
 N
ão(2
)
C
ond
it
ion
:Nã
oIsS
ele
cte
d.Sk
ipTo
:En
dofSu
rvey
.

Q2
.
C
ons
ide
ra-
seumu
ti
li
zado
rac
tiv
odoIn
sta
gram
?
 S
im(1
)
 N
ão(2
)
C
ond
it
ion
:Nã
oIsS
ele
cte
d.Sk
ipTo
:En
dofSu
rvey
.

Oqu
esã
oin
flu
enc
iado
res/b
logg
ers
?Osi
nfl
uen
cia
dor
es,d
igi
tai
sne
stec
aso
,ou
b
logg
ers
,sã
ope
sso
as,p
ers
ona
gen
soug
rup
osqu
esep
opu
lar
izamemr
ede
sso
cia
is
,
c
omop
ore
xem
plo
,noIn
sta
gram
.Es
sesi
nfl
uen
cia
dor
ess
ãop
ess
oasqu
ede
sen
vol
vem
c
ont
eúd
osea
cab
ama
ssimpo
rcr
iarumpúb
li
coemg
ran
dem
ass
aqu
eac
omp
anh
aca
da
umdo
sse
us"
pos
ts"
.Pa
rac
onc
lui
r,umi
nfl
uen
cia
doréa
lgu
émc
ujopon
tod
evi
staé
r
esp
ei
tadoeop
ini
ãoouv
ida
.

Q3
.
S
egu
eal
gumi
nfl
uen
cia
dor/b
logg
ern
oIn
sta
gram
?
 S
im(1
)
 N
ão(2
)
C
ond
it
ion
:Nã
oIsS
ele
cte
d.Sk
ipTo
:En
dofSu
rvey
.

57
Q4
.
Po
rfav
ori
ndi
que
,num
aes
cal
a en
tre 1(D
isc
ord
oTo
talm
ent
e) e 7(C
onc
ord
o
To
talm
ent
e),os
eun
íve
ldec
onc
ord
ânc
iac
omo
sse
gui
nte
sfa
cto
resi
ndi
cado
semb
aix
o,
emr
ela
çãoàs
egu
int
efr
ase
:
"S
igoi
nfl
uen
cia
dor
es/b
logg
ersn
oIn
sta
grampo
rqu
esã
o..
."
Não
Disco
rdo Disco
rdo Discordo Concordo Conco
rdo
D
isco
rdo Conco
rdo
T
otalmente Pa
rcia
lmente nem Pa
rcia
lmente T
ota
lmente
(2
) (6
)
(1) (3) Con co
rdo (5) (7
)
(4
)

A
tra
tivos (1
)       

C
lássicos/
      
Cha
rmosos (2
)

Bon
itos (3
)       

E
legan
tes(4
)       

Sexy (5
)       

Con
fiáve
is(6
)       

Hones
tos (7
)       

Lea
is(8
)       

S
ince
ros(9
)       

F
ided
ignos(10
)       

Espec
ial
istas(1
1)       

Expe
rien
tes(12
)       

En
tendedo
res(13
)       

Qua
li
ficados (14
)       

T
alen
tosos(15
)       

58
Q5
.
Po
rfav
ori
ndi
que
,num
aes
cal
a en
tre 1(D
isc
ord
oTo
talm
ent
e) e 7(C
onc
ord
o
To
talm
ent
e),emqu
eme
did
acon
cord
acoma
sse
gui
nte
saf
irm
açõ
esr
ela
tiv
amen
teàs
ua
i
nten
çãod
ecom
praqu
andov
êosi
nfl
uen
cia
dor
es/b
logg
ersqu
ese
guen
oIn
sta
grama
p
rom
ove
remump
rodu
toou m
arc
a:

Não
Disco
rdo Disco
rdo Discordo Concordo Conco
rdo
D
isco
rdo Conco
rdo
T
otalmente Pa
rcia
lmente nem Pa
rcia
lmente T
ota
lmente
(2
) (6
)
(1) (3
) Con co
rdo (5) (7
)
(4
)
Pretendocomp rar
osproduto squeos
inf
luenciadores/       
b
loggersp romovem
noInstagram.(1)
Éprová
velque
compreosprodutos
queos
      
inf
luenc
iadores/
b
loggerspromovem
noIns
tagram.(2)
T enhoumae levada
intençãodecomp rar
osprodutosqueos
      
inf
luenciadores/
bloggersp romo vem
noIns
tag ram.(3)

59
Q6
.
Po
rfav
ori
ndi
que
,po
rord
emd
epr
efe
rên
cia(
arr
ast
andoo
sit
ems-d
eix
andoemc
imao
s
i
tem
squ
etemp
ref
erên
ciaeemb
aix
oosqu
eme
nosp
ref
ere
),qu
eti
pod
econ
tad
e
i
nfl
uen
cia
dor/b
logg
ern
oIn
sta
gramt
emp
ref
erê
nci
aems
egu
ir
:
______ M
oda(1
)
______A
lim
ent
açã
o/R
est
aur
açã
o(2
)
______D
esi
gn(3
)
______B
ele
za(4
)
______ M
undoN
atu
ral(5
)
______C
ria
tiv
ida
de(6
)
______T
ecn
olog
ia(7
)
______En
tre
ten
imen
to/C
omé
dia(8
)
______Tu
ri
smo(9
)
______D
espo
rto(10
)

60
Q7
.
Po
rfa
vori
ndi
que
,se
lec
cion
andoaop
çãoqu
esea
dequ
aàs
uas
itu
açã
o.Q
uan
tot
empo
p
ass
apo
rdi
anoIn
sta
gram
?
 <30 m
in
.(1
)
 30 m
in
.-1h(2
)
 1h-1
.30h(3
)
 1
.30h-2h(4
)
 2h-2
.30h(5
)
 2
.30h-3h(6
)
 3h-3
.30h(7
)
 3
.30h-4h(8
)
 >4h(9
)

61
Q8.
Quantos posts pública por semana no Instagram?
Entre 0 e 2 posts (1)
Entre 2 e 4 posts (2)
Entre 4 e 6 posts (3)
Entre 6 e 8 posts (4)
Entre 8 e 10 posts (5)
Entre 10 e 12 posts (6)
Entre 12 e 14 posts (7)
Mais de 14 posts (8)

62
Q9.
Indique qual a sua idade:
18 - 24 (2)
25 - 34 (3)
35- 44 (4)
> 44 (5)

Q10.
Indique qual o seu género:
Feminino (1)
Masculino (2)

63
Q11
.
In
diqu
equ
alas
uao
cup
açã
o:
 E
stud
ant
e(1
)
 Em
pre
gadopo
rte
rce
iro
s(2
)
 Em
pre
gadopo
rcon
tap
róp
ria(3
)
 D
esem
pre
gado(4
)
 T
rab
alh
ado
r-E
stud
ant
e(5
)
 R
efo
rma
do(6
)
 O
utr
o(7
)

Q12
.
In
diqu
eos
eun
íve
lmáx
imod
ees
col
ari
dad
eat
ing
ida
:
 1
ºci
clo(
equ
iva
len
teàp
rim
ári
a)(1
)
 2
ºci
clo(
equ
iva
len
tea
o6ºa
no)(2
)
 3
ºci
clo(
equ
iva
len
tea
o9ºa
no)(3
)
 S
ecun
dár
io(
equ
iva
len
tea
o12
ºan
o)(4
)
 L
icen
cia
tur
a(5
)
 M
est
rado(6
)
 D
outo
ram
ento(7
)

Q13
.
In
diqu
eos
eun
íve
lder
end
imen
tol
íqu
ido m
ens
al
:
 0€-500€(1
)
 500€-1000€(3
)
 1000€-2500€(4
)
 2500€-3500€(5
)
 >3500€(6
)

As
uar
espo
staf
oir
egi
sta
da.M
uitoob
rig
adap
elasu
apa
rt
ici
paç
ão!

64
A
ppend
ix2
.Su
rve
ytr
ans
lat
ion

C
red
ibi
li
ty`
ssc
ale

C
red
ib
il
itỳss
cale(Oh
ani
an1
,99
0)

I
tem
s

V
ari
abl
e O
rig
ina
lst
atemen
t T
ran
sla
tionandad
apt
ation
If
oll
owin
flu
enc
ersonIn
stag
ramb
eca
uset
hey Si
goin
flu
enci
ado
res
/blo
ggersnoI
nst
agr
ampo
rqu
e
area
tt
rac
tiv
e s
ãoatra
tiv
os

If
oll
owin
flu
enc
ersonIns
tag
ramb
eca
uset
hey S
igoin
flu
enc
iado
res
/blo
ggersnoIns
tag
rampo
rqu
e
a
recl
assy sã
o c
lás
sico
s/c
h a
r m
osos

S
igoin
flu
enc
iad
ore
s/b
log
ger
sn oI
nst
agr
ampo
rqu
e
A
tt
rac
tiv
ene
ss If
oll
owin
flu
enc
erso
nInst
agramb
eca
uset
hey
sã
oboni
tos
ar
ehand
som e

If
oll
owin
flu
enc
ersonIn
sta
gramb
eca
uset
hey S
igoin
flu
enc
iad
ore
s/b
logge
rsnoIn
sta
grampo
rqu
e
aree
leg
ant sãoel
egan
tes

If
oll
owin
flu
enc
ersonI
nst
agr
amb
eca
uset
hey S
igoin
flu
enc
iad
ore
s/b
logge
rsnoI
nst
agr
ampo
rqu
e
ar
esexy sãose
xy

If
oll
owin
flu
ence
rsonIns
tagr
amb
eca
uset
hey S
igoin
flu
enc
iad
ore
s/blo
ggersnoIn
sta
grampo
rqu
e
a
redepe
ndable sãoconf
iáve
is

If
oll
owin
flu
ence
rsonIns
tagr
amb
eca
uset
hey S
igoin
flu
enc
iad
ore
s/blo
ggersnoIn
sta
grampo
rqu
e
arehon
est sãoh on
esto
s

T
rus
two
rth
ine
ss If
oll
owin
fluen
cersonInst
agrambecau
set
hey Si
goinflu
enc
iado
res/b
lo gg
e rsnoInst
agrampo
rque
arer
eli
able s
ã oleais

If
oll
owin
fluen
cersonInst
agrambecau
set
hey Si
goinflu
enc
iado
res/b
lo gg
e rsnoInst
agrampo
rque
ares
incere sãosinc eros
If
oll
owin
fluen
cersonInst
agrambecau
set
hey Si
goinflu
enc
iado
res/b
lo gg
e rsnoInst
agrampo
rque
aretru
stwor
th y sãofidedig no
s
If
oll
owin
flu
encersonInst
agram b
eca
uset
hey Sigoin
flu
enci
ado
res/b
lo ggersn oIns
tag
ramporq
ue
a
reexper
t sã oespec
i al
ista
s
If
oll
owin
fluen
cersonInst
agrambecau
set
hey Sigoin
flu
enci
ado
res/b
lo ggersn oIns
tag
ramporq
ue
areexper
ienced sãoex pe
rie n
tes
If
oll
owin
fluen
cersonInst
agrambecau
set
hey Si
goinflu
enc
iado
res/b
lo gg
e rsnoInst
agrampo
rque
Ex
per
ti
se ar
ek nowledg
ea b
le sãoent e
nd edores
If
oll
owin
fluen
cersonInst
agrambecau
set
hey Si
goinflu
enc
iado
res/b
lo gg
e rsnoInst
agrampo
rque
arequal
if
ied sã oqual
ificados
If
oll
owin
flu
enc
ersonIn
sta
gramb
eca
uset
hey S
igoin
flu
enc
iad
ore
s/blo
gge
rsnoIn
sta
grampo
rqu
e
aresk
il
led sãota
len
tos
os

P
urc
has
ein
ten
tion
`ss
cal
e

Pu
rch
asein
ten
tioǹs
sca
le(Dodd
s,Mon
roe&G
rew
al
,1991
)

I
tem
s

V
ari
able O
rig
ina
lst
atemen
t T
ran
sla
tionandad
apt
ation

Ip
ret
endt
obuytheproduc
tspromo
tedbyth
e P
retendocompr
arosprodu
tosqu
eos
inf
luen
cer
so nIns
tagr
am i
nfl
uen
ciador
e s
/bl
ogge
rspromovemnoIn
stag
ram

I
tisl
ike
lyth
atIw i
llbuythepro
duc
tsp
romo
ted Éprováv
elquecompreosprodu
tosqu
eo s
Pu
rch
asein
ten
tion bythei
nfluen
cersonIns
tag
ram in
fluenc
iador
es/b
logg
erspromovemnoIns
tagram

T
enhoumaelevadain
tençãodecompra
ros
Iamw
il
lin
gtobuythep
rodu
ctspromo
tedby
the
prod
uto
squ eosinf
luenc
iador
es/b
logg
ers
in
flu
ence
rsonIn
stag
ram
promovemn oInst
agr
am

65
Appendix 3. Principal component analysis

KMO and Bartlett`s test

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy 0.859
χ² 3293.527
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity df 153
ρ 0.000

Total variance explained

Total Variance Explained

Extraction Sums of Squared
Initial Eigenvalues Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Loadings
Component
% of Cumulative % of Cumulative % of Cumulative
Total Total Total
Variance % Variance % Variance %
1 6.168 34.265 34.265 6.168 34.265 34.265 3.744 20.801 20.801
2 3.383 18.792 53.057 3.383 18.792 53.057 3.433 19.071 39.872
3 2.121 11.785 64.842 2.121 11.785 64.842 3.385 18.806 58.679
4 1.400 7.780 72.622 1.400 7.780 72.622 2.510 13.943 72.622
5 0.681 3.784 76.406
6 0.610 3.391 79.797
7 0.517 2.870 82.667
8 0.470 2.612 85.28
9 0.427 2.373 87.653
10 0.385 2.140 89.793
11 0.309 1.717 91.510
12 0.291 1.617 93.127
13 0.263 1.463 94.590
14 0.240 1.332 95.922
15 0.214 1.187 97.109
16 0.201 1.115 98.224
17 0.177 0.982 99.207
18 0.143 0.793 100

66
 Rotated component matrix (factor analysis)

Rotated Component Matrix

Component
1 2 3 4
AT - Attractive (-)0.041 0.765 0.038 0.148
AT - Classy 0.122 0.714 0.177 0.137
AT - Handsome 0.004 0.900 (-)0.020 0.062
AT - Elegant 0.035 0.872 0.072 0.088
AT - Sexy 0.020 0.799 (-)0.026 0.027
TR - Dependable 0.737 0.088 0.306 0.177
TR - Honest 0.852 (-).017 0.187 0.189
TR - Reliable 0.879 0.042 0.157 0.174
TR - Sincere 0.840 0.003 0.230 0.073
TR - Trustworthy 0.756 0.028 0.315 0.144
EX - Expert 0.185 (-)0.055 0.839 0.006
EX - Experienced 0.167 0.045 0.835 0.052
EX - Knowledgeable 0.177 0.044 0.838 0.153
EX - Qualified 0.324 0.054 0.758 0.024
EX - Skilled 0.320 0.213 0.592 0.003
PI - I pretend to buy
the product 0.153 0.192 0.056 0.889
PI - It is likely that I
will buy the product 0.203 0.110 0.102 0.878
PI - I am willing to buy
the product 0.205 0.120 0.028 0.864

67
Appendix 4. Descriptives and reliability

Attractiveness dimension – descriptives and reliability

Attractiveness dimension (Ohanian, 1990)

Cronbach`s
Items x̅ σ Overall x̅
α
AT - Attractive 5.36 1.389

AT- Classy 4.68 1.555

AT - Handsome 4.99 1.571 0.875 4.976

AT - Elegant 5.06 1.485

AT - Sexy 4.79 1.678

Trustworthiness dimension – descriptives and reliability

Trustworthiness Dimension (Ohanian, 1990)

Cronbach`s
Items x̅ σ Overall x̅
α
TR - Dependable 4.18 1.659

TR - Honest 3.74 1.586

TR - Reliable 3.67 1.521 0.914 3.872

TR - Sincere 3.75 1.584

TR - Trustworthy 4.02 1.597

68
 Expertise dimension – descriptives and reliability

Expertise dimension (Ohanian, 1990)

Cronbach`s
Items x̅ σ Overall x̅
α
4.37 1.599
EX - Expert

EX - Experienced 4.68 1.508

EX - Knowledeable 4.64 1.560 0.870 4.568

EX - Qualified 4.18 1.687

EX - Skilled 4.96 1.601

Credibility construct – descriptives and reliability

Credibility construct (Ohanian, 1990)

Cronbach`s
Dimensions x̅ σ Overall x̅
Alpha
Attractiveness 4.976 1.255

Trustworthiness 3.872 1.371 0.869 4.472

Expertise 4.568 1.292

69
 Purchase intention construct – descriptives and reliability

Purchase intention construct (Dodds, Monroe & Grewal, 1991)

Cronbach`s
Items x̅ σ Overall x̅
α

PI - I pretend to
3.78 1.690
buy the product

PI - It is likely that I
will buy the 3.77 1.772 0.898 3.644
product

PI - I am willing to
3.38 1.696
buy the product

70
Appendix 5. Extra questions

I. Which kind of influencers do Instagram users prefer to follow?

Instagram users
preference on types of influencers

Type of Influencers x̅

Technology 6.98
Design 6.07
Natural World 5.83
Criativity 5.82
Beauty 5.45
Tourism 5.42
Fitness 5.29
Entertainment / Comedy 4.79
Food 4.27
Fashion 4.23

71
 Female – Instagram users

preference on types of influencers

Type of Influencers x̅

Technology 8.01
Fitness 6.91
Natural World 6.22
Criativity 5.98
Design 5.70
Tourism 5.33
Entertainment / Comedy 5.26
Beauty 4.53
Food 3.75
Fashion 2.35

Male – Instagram users

preference on types of influencers

Type of Influencers x̅

Design 6.55
Beauty 6.55
Fashion 6.36
Technology 5.83
Criativity 5.64
Tourism 5.54
Natural World 5.39
Food 4.86
Entertainment / Comedy 4.17
Fitness 3.66

72
II. How much time do Instagram users spent per day on Instagram?

Time spent on Instagram

25,40%

17,30%
14,80%
12,40%
9,20%
7,10% 6,70%
3,90% 3,20%

< 30 min. 30 min. - 1h - 1.30h - 2h - 2.30h - 3h - 3.30h - >4h

1h 1.30h 2h 2.30h 3h 3.30h 4h

Female`s Time spent on Instagram

18,90%
16,20% 15,50%
14,20%

10,80%
8,10%
5,40% 6,10%
4,70%

< 30 30 min. - 1h - 1.30h - 2h - 2.30h - 3h - 3.30h - >4h

min. 1h 1.30h 2h 2.30h 3h 3.30h 4h

73
 Male`s Time spent on Instagram
33,30%

18,20%
13,60%
10,60%
9,10%
6,80%
5,30%
1,50% 1,50%

< 30 30 min. - 1h - 1.30h - 2h - 2.30h - 3h - 3.30h - >4h

min. 1h 1.30h 2h 2.30h 3h 3.30h 4h

III. How many posts do Instagram users post on Instagram per week?

Posts posted per week

66,80%

18%
9,40%
3,10% 1,60% 0,40% 0,40% 0,40%

0 - 2 posts2 - 4 posts4 - 6 posts6 - 8 posts 8 - 10 10 - 12 12 - 14 > 14 posts

posts posts posts

74
 Female`s Posts posted per week
63,80%

20%

8,70%
3,90% 1,60% 0,80% 0,80% 0,80%

0 - 2 posts2 - 4 posts 4 - 6 posts6 - 8 posts 8 - 10 10 - 12 12 - 14 > 14 posts

posts posts posts

Male`s Posts posted per week

71,40%

14%
10,30%
2,40% 1,60% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00%

0 - 2 posts2 - 4 posts 4 - 6 posts6 - 8 posts 8 - 10 10 - 12 12 - 14 > 14 posts

posts posts pots

75
REFERENCES

Abdulmajid, M.A., Wahid, N.A. (2012). Endorser Credibility Effects on Yemeni Male
Consumer’s Attitudes towards Advertising, Brand Attitude and Purchase Intention: The
Mediating Role of Attitude toward Brand. International Business Research, 5(4), 55-66.

Ackaradejruangsri, P. (2015). Know me, like me, follow me, engage me, buy me: the
growing marketplace for new business ventures in Thailand. International Academy of
Marketing Studies Journal , 19 (3).

Agrawal, J., Kamakura, W.A., (1995). The Economic Worth of Celebrity Endorsers: An
Event Study Analysis. Journal of Marketing, 59, 56-62.

Akar, E. and Nasir, V. A. (2015). A review of literature on consumers’ online purchase

intentions. Journal of Costumer Behaviour, 14 (3), 215-233 .

Armstrong, C. L., & Nelson, M. R. (2005). How newspaper sources trigger gender
stereotypes. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 82(4), 820-837.

Amos, C., Holmes, G., Strutton, D. (2008). Exploring the Relationship Between
Celebrity Endorser Effects and Advertising Effectiveness: A Quantitative Synthesis of
Effect Size. International Journal of Advertising, 27(2), 209-234.

Applbaum, R., Anatol, K. (1972). The Factor Structure of Source Credibility as a

Function of the Speaking Situation. Speech Monographs, 39, 216-222.

Applbaum, R., Anatol, K. (1973). Dimensions of Source Credibility: A Test for

Reproducibility. Speech Monographs, 40, 231-237.

Atkin, C., & Block, M. (1983). Effectiveness of celebrity endorsers. Journal of

Advertising Research, 23, 57-61.

Baird, C.H. and Parasnis, G. (2011). From social media to social customer relationship
management. Strategy & Leadership, 39(5), 30–37.

Baek, T. H., Kim, J., Yu, J. H., (2010). The differential roles of brand credibility and

76
brand prestige in consumer brand choice. Psychol Mark, 27(7), 662-678.

Baker, W. H., Hutchinson, J. W., Moore, D. and Nedungadi, P. (1986). Brand familiarity
and advertising: effects on the evoked set and brand preference. Advances in Consumer
Research, 13(1), 637-642.

Baker, M., Churchill, G.A. (1977). The Impact of Physically Attractive Models on
Advertising Evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(4), 538-555.

Bayo-Moriones,A.,&Lera-L ́opez, F.(2007). Afirm-level analysis of determinants of

ICT adoption in Spain. Technovation, 27(6/7), 352-366.

Batra, R. and Keller, K.. (2016). Integrating Marketing Communications: New Findings,
New Lessons, and New Ideas. Journal of Marketing , 80, 122-145.

Blackshaw, P. (2006). The consumer-generated surveillance culture.

Berlo, D. K., Lemert, J. B., & Mertz, R. J. (1969). Dimensions for evaluating the
acceptability of message sources. Public Opinion Quarterly, 33(4), 563-576.

Berthon, P. R., Pitt, L. F., Plangger, K., & Shapiro, D. (2012). Marketing meets Web
2.0, social media, and creative consumers: Implications for international marketing
strategy. Business Horizons, 55(3), 261-271.

Bickart, B. and Schindler, R.M. (2001). Internet forums as influential sources of

consumer information. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 15(3), 31-40.

Boyd, D. M. (2006). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal
of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230.

Bowers, J., Phillips, W. (1967). A Note on the Generality of Source Credibility Scales.
Speech Monographs, 34, 185-186.

Bowles, J. (2016). Instagram: a visual view of the southeastern conference. Journal of

Contemporary Athletics, 10 (4).

Brodie, R., Coviello, R., Brookes, E. R., & Little, V. (1997). Towards a paradigm shift

77
in marketing? An examination of current marketing practices. Journal of Marketing
Management, 13, 383-406.

Bracken, C. C. (2006). Perceived source credibility of local television news: The impact
of television form and presence. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(4),
723-741.

Brandwatch (2016). 37 Instagram Statistics for 2016. (Retrieved on May, 2016 from
https://www.brandwatch.com/blog/37-instagram-stats-2016/)

Brown, J. J., & Reingen, P. H. (1987). Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior.
Journal of Consumer Research, 14(3), 350-362.

Chang, H., & Chen, S. (2008). The impact of online store cues on purchase intention.
Online Information Review, 32(6), 818-841

Chaiken, S. (1979). Communicator Physical Attractiveness and Persuasion. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1387-1397.

Cheung, M.Y., Luo, C., Sia, C.L. and Chen, H. (2009). Credibility of Electronic Word-
of-Mouth: Informational and Normative Determinants of Online Consumer
Recommendations. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 13(4), 9-38.

Chiu, Y., Lin, C. & Tang, L. (2005) Gender differs: assessing a model of online purchase
Intentions in e-tail service. Journal of Fashion Ma keting and Management, 16, 416-
435.

Chu, S.C. and Choi, S.M. (2011). Electronic Word-of-Mouth in Social Networking
Sites: A Cross-Cultural Study of the United States and China. Journal of Global
Marketing, 24(3), 263-281.

Chu, S. C., & Kim, Y. (2011). Determinants of consumer engagement in electronic

Word- of-Mouth (eWOM) in social networking sites. International Journal of
Advertising, 30(1), 47-75.

Clemons, E. (2009). The complex problem of monetizing virtual electronic social

networks. Decision Support Systems, 48, 46-56.

78
Comley, P., & Beaumont, J. (2011). On-line research, methods, benefits and issues –
part 2. Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, 13, 25-39.

Comrey, A. L., and Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.

Constantinides, E. and Fountain, S. J. (2008). Web 2.0: conceptual foundations and

marketing issues. Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, 9(3), 231-
244.

Corey, Lawrence G. (1971). People who Claim to be Opinion Leaders: Identifying Their
Characteristics by Self-Report. Journal of Marketing, 35, 48-53.

Cova, B., & Cova, V. (2002). Tribal marketing: The tribalisation of society and its
impact on the conduct of marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 36(5/6), 595-620.

Cova, B. a.nd White, T. (2010). Counter-brand and alter-brand communities: the impact
of Web 2.0 on tribal marketing approaches. Journal of Marketing Management, 26, 256-
270.

Crosby, L. A., Evans, K. R., & Cowles, D. (1990). Relationship quality in services
selling: An interpersonal influence perspective. Journal of Marketing, 54(3), 68-81.

Cronin, J. (2009). Upgrading to Web 2.0 An Experiential Project to Build a Marketing

Wiki . Journal of Marketing Education , 31, 66-75.

Debevec, K., & Kernan, J.B. (1984). More evidence on the effects of a presenter’s
attractiveness: Some cognitive, affective, and behavioral consequences. Advances in
Consumer Research, 11, 127-132.

Deaux, K., & Lewis, L. L. (1984). The structure of gender stereotypes: Interrelationships
among components and gender labels. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
46(6), 991-1004.

Dholakia, U., Richard P., and Lisa K. P. (2004), A Social Influence Model of Consumer
Participation in Network- and Small-group- based Virtual Communities. International
Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 241-63.

79
DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale Development: theory and applications. Applied Social
Research Methods Series, 26.

De Vries, L., Gensler, S. and Leeflang, P. S. H. (2012). Popularity of Brand Posts on

Brand Fan Pages: An Investigation of the Effects of Social Media Marketing. Journal of
Interactive Marketing, 26(2), 83-91.

Desarbo, W.S., Harshman, R.A. (1985), Celebrity-Brand Congruence Analysis. Current

Issues and Research in Advertising, 1, 17-52.

Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B. and Grewal, D. (1991), Effects of price, brand, and store
information on buyers’ product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 307-
319.

Doney, P. M., & Cannon, J. P. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-
seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 61(2), 35-51.

Erdogan, B.Z. (1999). Celebrity Endorsement: A Literature Review. Journal of

Marketing Management, 41(3), 291-314.

Erkan, I. (2015). Electronic Word of Mouth on Instagram: Customers’ Engagements

with Brands in Different Sectors . International Journal of Management , 2.

Freberg, K., Graham, K., McGaughey, K., & Freberg, L. (2010). Leaders or snakes in
suits: Public perceptions of today’s CEO. Association for Psychological Science.

Ferebee, S. (2007). An examination of the influences of involvement level of web

credibility of web sites.

Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2003). The perceived credibility of personal web page
information as influenced by the sex of the source. Computers in Human Behavior, 19,
683-701.

Friedman, H. H., & Friedman, L. (1979). Endorser effectiveness by product type.

Journal of Advertising Research, 19(5), 63-71.

Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: how people cope

80
with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 1-31.

Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in

consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 343-373.

Forsythe, S. M., & Shi, B. (2003). Consumer patronage and risk perceptions in Internet
shopping. Journal of Business Research, 56(11), 867-875.

Garbarino, E., & Strahilevitze, M. (2004). Gender differences in the perceived risk of
buying online and the effects of receiving a site recommendation. Journal of Business
Research, 57(7), 768-775.

Garifova, L. F. (2016). Realization of small businesses economic interests on instagram.

Journal of Economics and Economic Education Research , 17.

Gaziano, C., & McGrath, K. (1986). Measuring the concept of credibility. Journalism
Quarterly, 63(3), 451-462.

Godey, B., Manthiou, A. Pederzoli, D., Rokka, J. and Aiello, G. (2016). Social media
marketing efforts of luxury brands: Influence on brand equity and consumer behavior.
Journal of Business Research , 69, 5833-5841.

Goldsmith, R.E. (2002). Explaining and predicting consumer intention to purchase over
the internet: an exploratory study. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 10(1), 22-
8.

Goldsmith, R., Lafferty, B., Newell, S. (2000). The Impact of Corporate Credibility and
Celebrity Credibility on Consumer Reaction to Advertisements and Brands. Journal of
Advertising, 29(3), 43-54.

Goldsmith, R. and Latterfy, B. (1999). Corporate Credibility’s Role in Consumers’

Attitudes and Purchase Intentions When a High versus a Low Credibility Endorser Is
Used in the Ad. Journal of Business Research , 44, 109-116.

Guido, G. P. (2011). Beardedness in advertising: Effects on endorsers` credibility and

purchase intention. Journal of Marketing Communications , 17 (1), 37-49.

81
Habibi M. R., Laroche M, & Richard M. O. (2014). The roles of brand community and
community engagement in building brand trust on social media. Computers in Human
Behavior, 37,152-161.

Hair, J.F., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.L. (2005). Multivariate
data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Hasan, B. (2010). Exploring gender differences in online shopping attitude . Computers

in Human Behavior (26), 597-601.

Hassanein, K., & Head, M. (2007). Manipulating perceived social presence through the
web interface and its impact on attitude towards online shopping. International Journal
of Human-Computer Studies, 65(8), 689-708.

Hirschman, E. C. (1986). Humanistic inquiry in market research: Philosophy, method

and criteria. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(August), 237-249.

Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1997). A new marketing paradigm for electronic
commerce. The information Society, 13, 43-54.

Hoffman, D., & Novak, T. (2012). Toward a deeper understanding of social media.
Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(2), 69-70.

Hookway, N. (2008). Entering the blogosphere: Some strategies for using blogs in social
research. Qualitative Research, 8(1), 91-113.

Hovland, C.I., Janis, L.I., Kelley, H.H. (1953). Communication and Persuasion. New
Haven, CI: Yale University Press.

Hovland, C., Weiss, W. (1951). The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication

Effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635-650.

Hsu, Y. H., & Tsou, H.-T. (2010). Understanding customer experiences in online blog
environments. International Journal of Information Management, 31, 510-523.

Jiménez, F. R. and Mendoza, N. A. (2013). Too Popular to Ignore: The Influence of

Online Reviews on Purchase Intentions of Search and Experience Products. Journal of
Interactive Marketing , 27, 226-235.

82
Joseph, W. B. (1982). The credibility of physically attractive communicators: A review.
Journal of Advertising, 11, 15-24.

Johnson, T. J., Kaye, B. K., Bichard, S. L., & Wong, W. J. (2007). Every blog has its
day: Politically-interested internet users’ perceptions of blog credibility. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 100-122.

Kahle, L.R., Homer, P. (1985). Physical Attractiveness of the Celebrity Endorser: A

Social Adaptation Perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(4), 954-961.

Kaikati, J.G. (1987). Celebrity Advertising: A Review and Synthesis. International

Journal of Advertising, 6(2), 93-105.

Kaiser, H.F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31-36.

Kallas (2017). Top 15 Most Popular Social Networking Sites (and 10 Apps!). (Retrieved on May
20, 2017 from https://www.dreamgrow.com/top-15-most-popular-social-networking-
sites/)

Kapitan, S. and Silvera, D. (2016). From digital media influencers to celebrity endorsers:
attributions drive endorser effectiveness . Business Media New York , 27, 553-567.

Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and
opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59-68.

Keller, E., & Berry, J. (2003). The influentials: One American in ten tells the other nine
how to vote, where to eat, and what to buy. New York: Free Press.

Katz, E., Blumler, J., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Uses and gratifications research. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 504-523.

Kumar, R., Novak, J., Prabhakar, R., Andrew, T., 2004. Structure and evolution of
blogspace. Communication of the ACM ,47(12), 35-39.

Kemp, E., Childers, C. Y., & Williams, K. H. (2012). Place branding: creating self-brand
connections and brand advocacy. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 21(7), 508-
515.

83
Kim, J-W., Choi, J., Qualls, W., & Han, K. (2008). It takes a market place community
to raise brand commitment: The role of online communities. Journal of Marketing
Management, 24, 409-431.

Kim, S., Williams, R., & Lee, Y. (2003). Attitude toward online shopping and retail
website quality: A comparison of US and Korean consumers. Journal of International
Consumer Marketing, 16(1), 89-111.

Kim, W. G., Lee, C., & Hiemstra, S. J. (2004). Effects of an online virtual community
on customer loyalty and travel product purchases. Tourism Management, 25(3).

Kim, Y. J., & Na, J. H. (2007). Effects of celebrity athlete endorsement on attitude
toward the product: The role of credibility, attractiveness and the concept of congruence.
International Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 8, 310-320.

Kim, A. J., & Ko, E. (2010). Impacts of luxury fashion brand's social media marketing
on customer relationship and purchase intention. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing,
1(3), 164-171.

Koernig, S. K., & Boyd, T. C. (2009). To catch a tiger or let him go: The match-up effect
and athlete endorsers for sport and non-sport brands. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 18, 15-
37.

Korzaan, M. L. (2003). Going with the flow: Predicting online purchase intentions.
Journal of Computer Information Systems, 43(4), 25-31.

Kratzer, J., & Lettl, C. (2009). Distinctive roles of lead users and opinion leaders in the
social networks of schoolchildren. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(4), 646-659.

Lafferty, B.A., & Goldsmith, R.E. (1999). Corporate credibility’s role in consumers’
attitudes and purchase intentions when a high versus a low credibility endorser is used
in the ad. Journal of Business Research, 44, 109-116.

Lafferty, B.A., Goldsmith, R.E., & Newell, S.J. (2002). The dual credibility model: The
influence of corporate and endorser credibility on attitudes and purchase intentions.
Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 10, 1-12.

Lafferty, B. A., Goldsmith, R. E., & Flynn, L. R. (2005). Are innovators influenced by

84
endorser expertise in an advertisement when evaluating a high technology product?
Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 13(3), 32-48.

Lafferty, B.A., & Goldsmith, R.E. (2004). How in influential are corporate credibility
and endorser attractiveness when innovators react to advertisements for a new high-
technology product?. Corporate Reputation Review, 7, 24-36.

Laroche, M., Habibi, M. R., & Richard, M. O. (2013). To be or not to be in social media:
How brand loyalty is affected by social media?. International Journal of Information
Management, 33, 76-82.

Lassar, W., Mittal, B., & Sharma, A. (1995). Measuring customer-based brand equity.
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 12(4), 11-19.

Lee, Y. and Koo, J. (2015). Athlete Endorsement, Attitudes, and Purchase Intention: The
Interaction Effect Between Athlete Endorser-Product Congruence and Endorser
Credibility . Journal of Sport Management , 29, 523-538.

Lee, J, & Lee, J (2015). How purchase intention consummates purchase behaviour: The
stochastic nature of product valuation in electronic commerce. Behaviour & Information
Technology, 34, 1, 57-68.

Lee, J., & Thorson, E. (2008). The impact of celebrity-product incongruence on the
effectiveness of product endorsement. Journal of Advertising Research, 48, 433–449.

Leong, E. K. F., Huang, X., & Stanners, P. J. (1998). Comparing the effectiveness of the
web site with traditional media. Journal of Advertising Research, 38(5), 44–51.


Liao, Z., & Cheung, M. T. (2001). Internet-based e-shopping and consumer attitudes:
An empirical study. Information and Management, 38(5), 299–306.

Lin, H. F. (2007). Predicting consumer intentions to shop online: An empirical test of

competing theories. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 6(4), 433-442.

Liu, Y., Chen, Y., Zhou, C. F., 2010. Determinants of Customer Purchase Intention in
Electronic Service. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

Malhotra, N. K. (1999). Marketing research: An applied orientation. Upper Saddle

85
R
ive
r:P
ren
tic
e-H
all
.

M
alh
otr
a,N
.K.(2006
).P
esqu
isad
eMa
rke
tin
g:Um
aOr
ien
taç
ão. Boo
kmanC
ompanh
ia
Ed
.

M
ark
tes
t. (2016
). O
s p
ortugu
ese
s e a
s r
ede
s s
oci
ais
. R
etr
iev
ed f
rom
:
h
ttp
:/
/www
.ma
rkt
est
.com
/wa
p/a
/grp
/p~
96.
aspx

M
ango
ld,W
.G.
,an
dFa
uld
sD.J
.,(2009
).S
oci
alM
edi
a:Th
enewhy
bri
del
emen
tof
the
p
rom
oti
on m
ix
.Bu
sin
essH
ori
zon
s,52(4
),357
-36
5.

M
cCr
ack
en,G
.(1989
).W
hoi
sth
eCe
leb
ri
tyEndo
rse
r?C
ultu
ralF
oun
dat
ion
softh
e
En
dor
sem
entP
roc
ess
.Jou
rna
lofC
ons
ume
rRe
sea
rch
,16
(3)
,310
-322
.

M
cNe
ly,B
.J.(2012
). Sh
api
ngo
rga
niz
ati
ona
lim
age
-pow
erth
roughim
age
s:C
ase
h
is
tor
ieso
fIn
sta
gram
.Pr
ofe
ssi
ona
lComm
uni
cat
ionC
onf
eren
ceP
roc
eed
ing
s.

M
etz
ger
,M.J
.
,Fl
ana
gin
,A.J
.,Ey
al
,K.
,Lem
us,D
.R.
,& M
cCann
,R.M
.(2003
).
C
red
ibi
li
tyf
orth
e21
stc
entu
ry:In
teg
rat
ingp
ers
pec
tiv
esons
our
ce,m
ess
age
,an
dme
dia
c
red
ibi
li
tyi
nth
econ
tem
por
arym
edi
aenv
ironm
ent
.Comm
uni
cat
ionY
ear
boo
k,27
,293
-
336
.

M
eye
rs-L
evy
,J.(1988
).Th
ein
flu
enc
eofs
exro
lesonj
udgm
ent
.Jou
rna
lofC
ons
ume
r
R
ese
arh,14
c (4)
,522
-530
.

M
eye
rs-L
evy
,J.a
ndS
tern
tha
l,B
.(1991
).G
end
erd
if
fer
enc
esi
nth
eus
eofm
ess
agec
ues
a
ndj
udgm
ent
s.J
our
nalo
f Ma
rke
tingR
ese
arc
h,28
(1)
,84
-96
.

M
ere
dith
,M.J
.(2012
).S
tra
teg
icc
omm
uni
cat
iona
nds
oci
alm
edi
a:A
n MBAc
our
se
f
romab
usi
nes
scomm
uni
cat
ionp
ers
pec
tiv
e.Bu
sin
essandP
rof
ess
iona
lComm
uni
cat
ion
Q
uar
ter
ly,75
(1)
,89
-95
.

M
ess
ikR
.(2012
)-S
oci
alm
edi
a:b
les
singo
rcu
rse
? Ab
usi
nes
spe
rsp
ect
ive/
/Pub
li
c
In
ter
esta
ndP
riv
ateR
igh
tsi
nSo
cia
lMe
dia
.Av
olum
ein C
hando
sPub
li
shingSo
cia
l
M
ediaS
eri
es,145
-152
.

N
ei
lsen(2013
).G
lob
alt
rus
tina
dve
rt
is
ingan
dbr
andm
ess
age
s.S
ept
emb
er.A
cce
sse
d
a
t:h
ttp
:/
/www
.ni
els
en.c
om/u
s/en
/in
sigh
ts
/re
por
ts
/2013
/gl
oba
l-
tru
st-
in-
adv
ert
is
ing
-an
d-

86
brand-messages.html.

Napoleancat (2016). Instagram users in Portugal – November 2016. Retrieved on

November, 2016 from https://napoleoncat.com/blog/en/instagram-users-in-portugal-
november-2016/)

Naylor, R. W., Lamberton, C. P. & West, P. M. (2012). Beyond the “like” button: The
impact of mere virtual presence on brand evaluations and purchase intentions in social
media settings. Journal of Marketing, 76, pp. 105-120

O’Brien, C. (2011). The emergence of the social media empowered consumer. Irish
Marketing Review, 21(1–2), 32-40.

O’ Hara, B. S., Netemeyer, R. G., & Burton, S. (1991). An examination of the relative
effects of source expertise, trustworthiness, and likeability. Social Behavior and
Personality: An international journal, 19(4), 305-314.

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 Spokespersons’ Perceived Image on

Customers’ Intention to Purchase. Journal of Advertising Research, 31(1), 46-54.

Omnicore (2017). Instagram by the Numbers: Stats, Demographics & Fun Facts.
(Retrieved on April 29, 2017 from https://www.omnicoreagency.com/instagram-
statistics/)

O’Reilly, T. (2007). What is the web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the
next generation of software. Communications & Strategies, 65.

Palmer, A. and Bejou, D. (1995). The effects of gender on the development of

relationships between clients and financial advisers. The International Journal of Bank
Marketing, 13(3),18-27.

Papasolomou I & Melanthiou Y (2012) Social media: Marketing public relations new
best friend. Journal of Promotion Management, 18 (3),319-328.

87
Patzer, G.L. (1983), Source Credibility as a Function of Communicator Physical
Attractiveness. Journal of Business Research, 11(2), 229-241.

Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer Acceptance of Electronic Commerce: Integrating Trust

and Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Electronic
Commerce, 7(3), 101-134.

Pavlou, P. A., & Fygenson, M. (2006). Understanding and predicting electronic

commerce adoption: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. MIS Quarterly,
30(1), 115-143.

Petroshius, S.M., & Crocker, K.E. (1989). An empirical analysis of spokesperson

characteristics on advertisement and product evaluations. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 17, 217-225.

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Issue involvement as a moderator of the effects
on attitude of advertising content and context. Advances in Consumer Research, 8, 20-
24.

Pitt, L., Berthon, P., Watson, R., and Zinkhan, G. (2002). The Internet and the birth of
real consumer power. Business Horizons, 45(4), 7-14.

Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The Persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review

of Five Decades' Evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243-81.

Pornpitakpan, C. (2003). The effect of celebrity endorsers` perceived credibility on

product purchase intention: The case of Singaporeans. Journal of International
Consumer Marketing, 16(2), 55-74.

Putrevu, S. (2004). Communicating with the sexes: Male and female responses to print
advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 33(3), 51-62

Quinton, S. (2013). The digital era requires new knowledge to develop relevant CRM
strategy: a cry for adopting social media research methods to elicit this new knowledge.
Journal of Strategic Marketing , 21, 402-412.

Quinton, S. (2012). The community brand paradigm: A response to brand management’s

88
dilemma in the digital era. Journal of Marketing Management.

Roblek, V. B. (2013). The impact of social media to value added in knowledge-based

industries . Kybernetes , 42 (4), 554-568.

Rodgers, S., & Harris, M. A. (2003). Gender and e-commerce: An exploratory study.
Journal of Advertising Research, 43(3), 322-329.

Salomon, D. (2013). Moving on from Facebook. Using Instagram to connect with under
graduates and engage in teaching and learning. College & Research Libraries News,
74(8), 408-412.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., and Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business
Students. Edinburgh: Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Schaffer, Eric (2000). A better way for web design. Information Week, 784, 194.

Schau, J. H., Muniz, M. A., and Arnould, J. E. (2009). How brand community practices
create value. Journal of Marketing, 73(5), 30–51.

Schlecht, C. (2003), Celebrities’ Impact on Branding. (Retrieved from

http://worldlywriter.com/images/portfolio/proposals/celebrity_branding.pdf)

Schmallegger, D., & Carson, D. (2008). Blogs in tourism: Changing approaches to

information exchange. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 14(2), 99-110.

Siemens, J.C., Smith, S., Fisher, D., & Jensen, T.D. (2008). Product expertise versus
professional expertise: Congruency between an endorser’s chosen profession and the
endorsed product. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 16,
159-168.

Smith, R.G. (1973). Source credibility context effects. Communication Monographs, 40,
303-309.

Sertoglu, A. E., Catli, O and Korkmaz, S. (2014). Examining the effect of endorser
credibility on the consumers` buying intentions: an empirical study in Turkey.
International Review of Management and Marketing , 4 (1), 66-77.

89
Seybert, H. (2012). Internet use in households and by individuals 2012. (Retrieved
January 25, 2013, from http://epp.eurostat. ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-
12-050/EN/KS-SF-12-050-EN.PDF)

Solomon, M. R. (2002). Consumer behavior: buying, having and being. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Statista (2017). Instagram: number of monthly active users 2013-2017. (Retrieved on

April, 2017 from https://www.statista.com/statistics/253577/number-of-monthly-
active-instagram-users/)

Statista (2017). Most popular brands on Instagram 2017, by followers. (Retrieved on

May, 2017 from https://www.statista.com/statistics/253710/leading-brands-ranked-by-
number-of-instagram-followers/)

Taylor, G., Jeffery, E. and David, S. (2011). Friends, Fans, and Followers: Do Ads Work
on Social Networks? How Gender and Age Shape Receptivity. Journal of Advertising
Research, 51(1), 258-76.

Taylor, M., Kent, M., & White, W. (2001). How activist organizations are using the
internet to build relationships. Public Relations Review, 27, 263-284.

Thamizhvanan, A., & Xavier, M. (2013). Determinants of customers’ online purchase

intention: an empirical study in India. Journal of Indian Business Research, 5(1), 17-32.

Thompson, S.A., & Sinha, R. K. (2008). Brand communities and new product adoption:
The influence and limits of oppositional loyalty. Journal of Marketing, 72(6), 65-80.

Till B. D., and Shimp, T. A. (1998). Endorsers in advertising: The case of negative
celebrity information. Journal of Advertising 27(1), 67-82.

Till, B. D., Busler, M., (1998). Matching Products with Endorser: Attractiveness versus
Expertise. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 15(6), 576-586.

Uncles, M. D. (2008). Know the changing consumer. Journal of Brand Management,

15(4), 227-231.

Union, I. T. (2009). Media statistics: Mobile phone subscribers (most recent) by country.

90
Retrieved December 6, 2013, from:
http://www.NationMaster.com/graph/med_mob_pho- media-mobile-phones.

Uzunog ̆lu, E. and Kip, S. (2014). Brand communication through digital influencers:
Leveraging blogger engagement . International Journal of Information Management ,
34, 592-602 .

Van der Waldt, D., Van Loggerenberg, M., Wehmeyer, L. (2009), Celebrity
Endorsements versus Created Spokespersons in Advertising: A Survey among Students.
SAJEMS, 12(1), 110-114.

Van der Heijden, H., Verhagen, T., & Creemers, M. 2003. Understanding Online
Purchase Intentions: Contributions from Technology and Trust Perspectives. European
Journal of Information Systems, 12(1), 41-48.

Walker, M., Langmeyer, L., Langmeyer, D. (1992). Commentary – Celebrity Endorsers:

Do You Get What You Pay For? The Journal of Services Marketing, 6, 35.

Watts, D. J., & Dodds, P. S. (2007). Influentials, networks, and public opinion formation.
Journal of Consumer Research, 34(4), 441–458.

Wang, X., Yu, C. (2012). Social Media Peer Communication and Impacts on Purchase
Intentions: A Consumer Socialization Framework . Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26
(26), 198-208 .

Wells, J. D., Valacich, J. S. and Hess, T. J. (2011). What signal are you sending? How
website quality influences perceptions of product quality and purchase intentions. MIS
Quarterly, 35(2), 373-396.

Wearesocial (2017). Digital in 2017: Southern Europe. Retrieved on 2017 from

https://www.slideshare.net/wearesocialsg/digital-in-2017-southern-europe)

Wersm (2014). The complete history of Instagram. (Retrieved on January 34, 2014 from
http://wersm.com/the-complete-history-of-instagram/)

White, J. K., Hendrick, S. S., Hendrick, C. (2004). Big five personality variables and
relationship constructs. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(7), 1519-1530.

91
White, D.W., Goddard, L., & Wilbur, N. (2009). The effects of negative information
transference in the celebrity endorsement relationship. International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 37, 322-335.

Wu, S. I. (2003). Relationship between consumer characteristics attitude toward online

shopping. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 21(1), 37-44.

Wu, C., & Shaffer, D.R. (1987). Susceptibility to persuasive appeals as a function of
source credibility and prior experience with the attitude object. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 52, 677-688.

Wu, W., & Lee, Y. (2012). The Effect of Blog Trustworthiness, Product Attitude, and
Blog Involvement on Purchase Intention. International Journal of Management &
Information Systems, 16(3), 265-276.

Yang, S. U., & Lim, J. S. (2009). The effects of blog-mediated public relations (BMPR)
on relational trust. Journal of Public Relations Research, 21(3), 341-359.

Yang, K. C. C. (2007). Factors influencing internet users’ perceived credibility of news-

related blogs in Taiwan. Telematics and Informatics, 24, 69–85.

Yoon, K., Kim, C.H., Kim, M.S. (1998). A Cross-Cultral Comparison of the Effects of
Source Credibility on Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions. Mass Communication &
Society, 1(3/4), 153-173.

Zhang, Y., Moe, W. (2017). Modeling the role of message content and influencers in
social media rebroadcasting. International Journal of Research in Marketing (34), 100-
119.

Zhang, J., Farris, P. W., Irvin, J. W., Kushwaha, T., Steenburgh, T. J., & Weitz, B. A.
(2010). Crafting integrated multichannel retailing strategies. Journal of Interactive
Marketing, 24(2), 168-180.

92