This study investigates how nonprofit organizations could develop their websites to elicit positive evaluations and increase fundraising. More specifically, it focuses on the use of celebrity endorsements in an online context. The interaction between perceived congruence of the celebrity with the nonprofit organization and the level of interactivity induced by the website is examined on website experience, which is an important predictor of the attitude toward—and donation intentions for—a (fictitious) nonprofit organization. Using a 2 × 2 between-subjects experimental design (N = 122), the level of website interactivity and the (in)congruence between the celebrity and the organization are manipulated. The results show that an incongruent celebrity endorser incites a more favorable website experience than a congruent endorser on an interactive website. This, in turn, leads to a more positive attitude and a higher donation intention for the charity. In a non-interactive context, a congruent versus incongruent endorser has no differential impact on people’s responses.
AmosC.HolmesG.StruttonD. (2008). Exploring the relationship between celebrity endorser effects and advertising effectiveness. International Journal of Advertising, 27, 209-234.
2.
ArielyD. (2000). Controlling the information flow: Effects on consumers’ decision making and preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 233-248.
3.
BagozziR.P.DholakiaU.M. (1999). Goal setting and goal striving in consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing, 63, 19-32.
4.
BaiB.LawR.WenI. (2008). The impact of website quality on customer satisfaction and purchase intentions: Evidence from Chinese online visitors. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27, 391-402.
5.
BakerS. M.PettyR. E. (1994). Majority and minority influence: Source-position imbalance as a determinant of message scrutiny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 5-19.
6.
BakerW. E. (1999). When can affective conditioning and mere exposure directly influence brand choice?Journal of Advertising, 28(4), 31-46.
7.
BennettR.SavaniS. (2011). Sources of new ideas for charity fundraising: An empirical study. Creativity and Innovation Management, 20, 121-138.
8.
BiswasS.HussainM.O’DonnellK. (2009). Celebrity endorsements in advertisements and consumer perceptions: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Global Marketing, 22, 121-137.
9.
BrengmanM.GeuensM. (2004). The four dimensional impact of color on shopper’s emotions. Advances in Consumer Research, 31(1), 122-128.
10.
CampbellM.C.GoodsteinR. C. (2001). The Moderating Effect of Perceived Risk on Consumers’ Evaluations of Product Incongruity: Preference for the Norm. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 439-449.
11.
ChandrasekaranR. (2004). The influence of redundant comparison prices and other price presentation formats on consumers’ evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, 80, 53-66.
12.
ChangC.LeeY. (2009). Framing charity advertising: Influences of message framing, image valence, and temporal framing on a charitable appeal. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 2910-2935.
13.
ChungH.ZhaoX. (2006). Effects of perceived interactivity on Web site preference and memory: Role of personal motivation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(1), 00-00.
14.
CoyleJ. R.ThorsonE. (2001). The effects of progressive levels of interactivity and vividness in web marketing sites. Journal of Advertising, 30(3), 65-77.
15.
CugelmanB.ThelwallM.DawesP. (2011). Online interventions for social marketing health behavior change campaigns: A meta-analysis of psychological architectures and adherence factors. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 13(1), e17.
16.
CuiY.ChipchaseJ.JungY. (2007). Personal TV: A qualitative study of mobile TV users. In CesarP.ChorianopoulosK.JensenJ.F. (Eds.), Interactive TV: A shared experience (pp. 195-204). Amsterdam: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
17.
ErdoganB. Z. (1999). Celebrity endorsement: A literature review. Journal of Marketing Management, 15, 291-314.
18.
FelthamT.S.AmoldS. (1994). Program involvement and ad/program consistency as moderators of program context effects. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 3(1), 51-77.
19.
FillC. (2000). Essentially a matter of consistency: Integrated marketing communications. The Marketing Review, 1, 409-425.
20.
FleckN.KorchiaM.Le RoyI. (2012). Celebrities in advertising: Looking for congruence or likability?Psychology & Marketing, 29, 651-662.
21.
FleckN.MailleV. (2010). Thirty years of conflicting studies on the influence of congruence as perceived by the consumer: Overview, limitations, and avenues for research. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 25(4), 69-92.
22.
FleckN.QuesterP. (2007). Birds of a feather flock together . . . definition, role, and measure of congruence: An application to sponsorship. Psychology & Marketing, 24, 975-1000.
23.
FortinD. R.DholakiaR. R. (2005). Interactivity and vividness effects on social presence and involvement with a web-based advertisement. Journal of Business Research, 58, 387-396.
24.
GigerenzerG.ToddP. M. (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
25.
GoodsteinR. C. (1993). Category-based applications and extensions in advertising: Motivating more extensive ad processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 20, 87-99.
26.
GygiK. (1990). Recognizing the symptoms of hypertext . . . and what to do about it. In LaurelB. (Ed.), The art of human-computer interface design (pp. 279-288). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
27.
HairJ.AndersonR.TathamR.BlackW. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
28.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: Guilford Press.
29.
HecklerS. E.ChildersT. L. (1992). The role of expectancy and relevancy in memory for verbal and visual information: What is incongruency?Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 475-492.
30.
HeiderF. (1946). Attitudes and cognitive organization. Journal of Psychology, 21, 107-112.
31.
HeiderF. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York, NY: Wiley.
32.
HoffmanD. L.NovakT. P. (1996). Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments: Conceptual foundations. The Journal of Marketing, 60, 50-68.
33.
HsuJ. L.LiangG.TienC. (2005). Social concerns and willingness to support charities. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 33, 189-200.
34.
IngenhoffD.KoellingM. (2009). The potential of web sites as a relationship building tool for charitable fundraising NPOs. Public Relations Review, 35, 66-73.
35.
JagreE.WatsonJ. J.WatsonJ. G. (2001). Sponsorship and congruity theory: A theoretical framework for explaining consumer attitude and recall of event sponsorship. Advances in Consumer Research, 28, 439-445.
36.
KaminsM. A. (1990). An investigation into the “match-up” hypothesis in celebrity advertising: When beauty may be only skin deep. Journal of Advertising, 19(1), 4-13.
37.
KaminsM. A.GuptaK. (1994). Congruence between spokesperson and product type: A match-up hypothesis perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 11, 569-586.
38.
KirschnerP. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 1-10.
39.
KononovaA.YuanS. (2015). Double-dipping effect? How combining YouTube environmental PSAs with thematically congruent advertisements in different formats affects memory and attitudes. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 15, 2-15.
40.
KoufarisM.KambilA.LaBarberaP. A. (2002). Consumer Behavior in Web-Based Commerce: An empirical study. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6(2), 131-154.
41.
KruikemeierS.van NoortG.VliegenthartR.de VreeseC.H. (2013). Getting closer: the effects of personalized and interactive online political communication. European Journal of Communication, 28(1), 53-66.
42.
LaneV. R. (2000). The impact of ad repetition and ad content on consumer perceptions of incongruent extensions. Journal of Marketing, 64(2), 80-91.
43.
LangA. (2000). The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. Journal of Communication, 50(1), 46-70.
44.
LeeE. J.SchumannD. (2004). Explaining the special case of incongruity in advertising: Combining classic theoretical approaches. Marketing Theory, 4, 59-90.
45.
ListerM.DoveyJ.GiddingsS.GrantI.KellyK. (2009). New media: A critical introduction. London, England: Routledge.
46.
LiuY.ShrumL. J. (2002). What is interactivity and is it always such a good thing? Implications of definition, person, and situation for the influence of interactivity on advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 53-64.
47.
LynchP. D.KentR. J.SrinivasanS. S. (2001). The global internet shopper: Evidence from shopping tasks in twelve countries. Journal of Advertising Research, 41(3), 15-24.
48.
MallinckrodtV.MizerskiD. (2007). The effects of playing an advergame on young children’s perceptions, preferences, and requests. Journal of Advertising, 36(2), 87-100.
49.
MandlerG. (1982). The structure of value: Accounting for taste. In ClarkM. S.FiskeS. T. (Eds.), Affect and cognition: The 17th annual Carnegie symposium (pp. 3-36). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
50.
ManningK. C.SprottD. E.MiyazakiA. D. (1998). Consumer response to quantity surcharges: Implications for retail price setters. Journal of Retailing, 74, 373-399.
51.
McCrackenG. (1986). Culture and consumption: A theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 71-84.
52.
Meyers-LevyJ.LouieT. A.CurrenM. T. (1994). How does the congruity of brand names affect evaluations of brand name extensions?Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 46-53.
53.
Meyers-LevyJ.TyboutA. (1989). Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 39-54.
54.
MillerG. A.GalanterE.PribaumK. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior. New York, NY: Adams-Bannister-Cox.
55.
MisraS.BeattyS. E. (1990). Celebrity spokesperson and brand congruence: An assessment of recall and affect. Journal of Business Research, 21, 159-173.
56.
MurphyS.T.ZajoncR.B. (1993). Affect, cognition, and awareness: Affective priming with optimal and suboptimal stimulus exposures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 723-739.
57.
NovakT.P.HoffmanD.L.YungY.-F. (2000). Measuring the customer experience in online environments: A structural modeling approach. Marketing Science, 19(1), 22–42.
58.
OhanianR. (1991). The impact of celebrity spokespersons’ perceived image on consumers’ intention to purchase. Journal of Advertising Research, 31, 46-54.
59.
PreacherK. J.RuckerD. D.HayesA. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate behavioral research, 42(1), 185-227.
60.
PringleH.BinetL. (2005). How marketers can use celebrities to sell more effectively. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4, 201-214.
61.
RifonN. J.ChoiS. M.TrimbleC. S.LiH. (2004). Congruence effects in sponsorship: The mediating role of sponsor credibility and consumer attributions of sponsor motive. Journal of Advertising, 33(1), 30-42.
62.
SenguptaJ.GoodsteinR. C.BoningerD. S. (1997). All cues are not created equal: Obtaining attitude persistence under low-involvement conditions. Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 351-361.
63.
SenoD.LukasB. A. (2007). The equity effect of product endorsement by celebrities: A conceptual framework from a co-branding perspective. European Journal of Marketing, 41, 121-134.
64.
SheininD. A.SchmittB. H. (1994). Extending brands with new product concepts: The role of category attribute congruity, brand affect, and brand breadth. Journal of Business Research, 31, 1-10.
65.
SkadbergY. X.KimmelJ. R. (2004). Visitors’ flow experience while browsing a web site: Its measurement, contributing factors, and consequences. Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 403-422.
66.
SmithJ. R.McSweeneyA. (2007). Charitable giving: The effectiveness of a revised theory of planned behaviour model in predicting donating intentions and behaviour. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 17, 363-386.
67.
SundarS. S.KalyanaramanS. (2004). Arousal, memory, and impression–formation effects of animation speed in web advertising. Journal of Advertising, 33(1), 7-17.
68.
van NoortG.VoorveldH. A.van ReijmersdalE. A. (2012). Interactivity in brand web sites: Cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses explained by consumers’ online flow experience. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26, 223-234.
69.
VorvoreanuM. (2008). Website experience analysis: A new research protocol for studying relationship building on corporate websites. Journal of Website Promotion, 3(3-4), 222- 249.
70.
WenturaD. (1999). Activation and inhibition of affective information: Evidence for negative priming in the evaluation task. Cognition and Emotion, 13, 65-91.
71.
WheelerR. (2009). Nonprofit advertising: Impact of celebrity connection, involvement, and gender on source credibility and intention to volunteer time or donate money. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 21, 80-107.
72.
YoonH. J. (2012). Understanding schema incongruity as a process in advertising: Review and future recommendations?Journal of Marketing Communications, 19, 360-376.
