Analyzing the Influence of Social Media Influencer’s Attributes and Content Esthetics on Endorsed Brand Attitude and Brand-Link Click Behavior: The Mediating Role of Brand Content Engagement

Figures & data

Figure 1. Proposed model.

Table 1. Constructs, measurement items, factors, loading and reliability.

		Factor Loading
Construct	Scale-Items	Factor 1	Factor 2	Alpha
SMI Credibility	T1. The SMI I follow on Instagram is genuine.	.81	–	.85
	T2. The SMI I follow on Instagram is honest.	.80	–
	T3. The SMI I follow on Instagram is honorable.	.77	–
	T4. The SMI I follow on Instagram is reliable.	.76	–
	E1. The SMI I follow on Instagram is experienced at providing content about brands.	–	.87	.90
	E2. The SMI I follow on Instagram is knowledgeable about brands.	–	.85
	E3. The SMI I follow on Instagram is well informed about brands.	–	.85
	E4. The SMI I follow on Instagram is an expert on brands.	–	.81
SMI Attractiveness	A1. The SMI I follow on Instagram is sexy.	.88	–	.91
	A2. The SMI I follow on Instagram is good-looking.	.87	–
	A3. The SMI I follow on Instagram is stylish.	.86	–
	A4. The SMI I follow on Instagram is elegant.	.83	–
	S1. The SMI and I have similar interests.	–	.88	.87
	S2. The SMI I follow on Instagram has a lot in common with me.	–	.85
	S3. The SMI I follow on Instagram has similar tastes and preferences as me.	–	.81
	S4. The SMI and I have similar values.	–	.80
Brand Content Esthetics	CA1.The SMI I follow on Instagram posts attractive photos and video clips about brands.	.89	–	.89
	CA2.The SMI I follow on Instagram posts lovely photos and video clips about brands.	.88	–
	CA3.The SMI I follow on Instagram posts fascinating photos and video clips about brands.	.87	–
	CA4. The SMI I follow on Instagram posts beautiful photos and video clips about brands.	.81	–
Followers’ Brand Content Engagement	CS1. When SMI uploads photos and video clips of brands on Instagram, I watch them.	.79	–	.83
	CS2. I click the like button when the SMI shares video clips of brands on Instagram.	.87	–
	CS3. I click the like button when SMI shares pictures of brands on Instagram.	.87	–
	CT1. I engage in commenting on the SMI-generated brand-related photos and video clips.	–	.89	.82
	CT2. I share brand-related SMI-generated pictures and video clips with my friends and followers on Instagram.	–	.91
Attitude toward the Endorsed Brand	AT1. The brands, which SMI endorses on Instagram, are good.	.87	–	.91
	AT2. The brands, which SMI endorses on Instagram, are favorable.	.86	–
	AT3. The brands, which SMI endorses on Instagram, are likable.	.85	–
	AT4. The brands, which SMI endorses on Instagram, are my favorite.	.84	–
	AT5. The brands, which SMI endorses on Instagram, are interesting.	.80	–
Brand-Link Click Behavior	CL1. I click on SMI endorsed brand links (owned and sponsored) if they come across when I am using Instagram.	.93	–	.83
	CL2. I search SMI endorsed brands on Instagram and click on their sponsored links.	.92	–

Table 2. Constructs, dimensions, scale-items, path statistics and AVE.

Construct	Dimensions		Scale-Items	ß	SE	t	P	AVE
SMI Credibility	Trustworthiness	→	T1	.77	–	–	***	0.59
		→	T2	.82	.076	13.702	***
		→	T3	.75	.074	12.713	***
		→	T4	.73	.075	12.072	***
	Expertise	→	E1	.83	–	–	***	0.69
		→	E2	.85	.055	16.875	***
		→	E3	.84	.057	16.862	***
		→	E4	.80	.056	15.911	***
SMI Attractiveness	Physical Attractiveness	→	A1	.87	–	–	***	0.70
		→	A2	.86	.052	18.583	***
		→	A3	.83	.053	17.772	***
		→	A4	.78	.054	16.371	***
	Similarity	→	S1	.88	–	–	***	0.64
		→	S2	.81	.060	16.008	***
		→	S3	.76	.060	14.768	***
		→	S4	.73	.059	14.260	***
Brand Content Esthetics	–	→	CA1	.86	–	–	***	0.67
		→	CA2	.84	054	17.676	***
		→	CA3	.84	.054	17.708	***
		→	CA4	.74	.056	14.867	***
Followers’ Brand Content Engagement	Consuming	→	CS1	.64	–	–	***	0.65
		→	CS2	.86	.120	11.516	***
		→	CS3	.89	.127	11.518	***
	Contributing	→	CT1	.91	–	–	***	0.71
		→	CT2	.77	.100	8.377	***
Attitude toward the Endorsed brand	–	→	AT1	.85	–	–	***	0.66
		→	AT2	.86	.056	17.921	***
		→	AT3	.83	.057	17.064	***
		→	AT4	.79	.057	15.995	***
		→	AT5	.73	.059	14.641	***
Brand-Link Click Behavior	–	→	CL1	–	–	–	–	–
		→	CL2	–	–	–	–	–

Note: T1-T4, E1-E4, A1-A4, S1-S4, CA1-CA4, CS1-CS3, CT1-CT2, AT1-AT5 and CL1-CL2 represent items related to trustworthy, expertise, physical attractiveness, similarity, brand content esthetics, consumer, contribute, attitude toward endorsed brand and brand link click respectively. ß represents standardized estimates, SE standard error, t CR-critical ratio, & P level of significance and AVE average variance extracted.

Table 3. Descriptive statistics and discriminant validity matrix.

Construct	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1.Trustworthiness	[.77]
2.Expertise	.45**	[.83]
3.Physical Attractiveness	.68**	.63**	[.84]
4.Similarity	.27**	.12*	.086	[.80]
5.Brand Content Esthetics	.49**	.72**	.67**	.09	[.82]
6.Consuming	.58**	.62**	.59**	.25**	.66**	[.79]
7.Contributing	.24**	.29**	.19**	.38**	.27**	.43**	[.84]
8.Attitude toward Endorsed the Brand	.61**	.63**	.63**	.16**	.67**	.71**	.37**	[.81]
Mean	2.0517	2.0692	1.8550	3.1550	2.1642	2.2833	3.1400	2.2913
Std. Deviation	.93129	.99308	.98219	1.09391	1.05608	1.05976	1.25858	.96732

Note: n = 300. **Correlation is sig. at the 0.01 level. *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level, and AVE is shown in Brackets.

Figure 2. Tested model.

Table 4. Summary of hypotheses testing.

Hypothesis	Path	Result	Findings
Brand Content Engagement as a Mediator
H1a	SMI’s credibility → Brand content engagement → Attitude toward the endorsed brand	Partially Supported	Only the consuming dimension of brand content engagement mediates between trustworthiness and attitude toward the endorsed brand. Both dimensions (i.e. consuming and contributing) of brand engagement mediate between expertise and attitude toward the endorsed brand engagement.
H1b	SMI’s attractiveness → Brand content engagement → Attitude toward endorsed the brand	Partially Supported	Brand content engagement does not mediate between physical attractiveness and attitude toward the endorsed brand. In contrast, it mediates between similarity and attitude toward the endorsed brand.
H1c	Brand content esthetics → Brand content engagement → Attitude toward the endorsed brand	Partially Supported	Only the consuming dimension of brand engagement mediates between brand content esthetics and attitude toward the endorsed brand.
Direct Influence of SMI’s Attributes and Brand Content Esthetics
H2a	SMI’s credibility → Attitude toward the endorsed brand	Supported	SMI’s credibility (i.e. trustworthiness and expertise) directly influences followers’ attitude toward the endorsed brand.
H2b	SMI’s attractiveness → Attitude toward the endorsed brand	Not Supported	SMI’s attractiveness (i.e. physical attractiveness and similarity) has no direct effect on followers’ attitude toward the endorsed brand.
H2c	Brand content esthetics → Attitude toward the endorsed brand	Supported	Brand content esthetics directly influence followers’ attitude toward the endorsed brand.
Mediating Role of Attitude toward the Endorsed brand
H3	Brand content engagement → Attitude toward the endorsed brand → Endorsed brand link click behavior	Supported	Attitude toward the endorsed brand mediates between followers’ brand content engagement and their endorsed brand link click behavior.
Direct Influence of Brand Content Engagement on the endorsed brand link click behavior
H4	Followers’ brand content engagement → Endorsed brand link click behavior	Partially Supported	Only the contributing dimension of brand content engagement directly influences followers’ endorsed brand link click behavior.