Content uploaded by Alan J. Bush
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Alan J. Bush
Content may be subject to copyright.
Sports Celebrity Influence on the Behavioral
Intentions of Generation Y
Teenagers currently spend an estimated $153 billion a year on everything from
computers to cars to clothes (Brand, 2000). Trend conscious teens are very active in
utilizing the media and advertising in seeking out the latest products, services, and
fashions (Zollo, 1995). A greater understanding of teens’ role model influences can
help organizations and their advertising agencies more effectively target and
communicate to this growing market. In this study, we examine the effect of athlete
role models on teenagers’ purchase intentions and behaviors. Results from a survey
of 218 adolescents are discussed with implications and future research directions for
advertising and sports marketing researchers.
“When I take my kid out and hit him ground balls at shortstop, he wants to be Derek Jeter.
He doesn’t want to be me. So any professional athlete who tells you he’s not a role
model is full of baloney”
—Father and Little League Coach (Pulley 2001, p. 131)
S
PORTS AND SPORTS CELEBRITIES
have become ma-
jor spectacles of today’s media culture. Sports
celebrities have been looked upon as role models
for decades, and with the technological advances
in broadcast and interactive media, it appears that
famous and infamous athletes are everywhere
(Jones and Schumann, 2000). Over the years, ad-
vertisers have paid famous athletes millions of
dollars to endorse their products. Sports celebri-
ties’ endorsement responsibilities can range from
using or wearing certain brands (e.g., Tiger Woods
and Nike apparel) to providing actual brand tes-
timonials (e.g., Rafael Palmiero of the Texas Rang-
ers and Viagra). Some of the most widely utilized
advertising spokespersons today are famous ath-
letes such as Michael Jordan (Nike, Hanes, Gato-
rade), Tiger Woods (Wheaties, Buick, Target),
Shaquille O’Neal (Radio Shack, Nestles, Burger
King), Venus Williams (Reebok), and so on.
Despite the widespread use of athletes as prod-
uct or brand endorsers, there is a relative lack of
published research that investigates the influence
these athletes may have on a target market. Fur-
ther, it remains questionable as to whether or not
celebrity endorsers really make a difference on the
bottom line for advertisers. Miciak and Shanklin
(1994) reported that only one out of five commer-
cials that included celebrity endorsers met adver-
tisers’ strategic expectations. Researchers have
concluded that celebrity endorsers may not have
“connected” or identified with the intended target
market (cf. Sukhdial, Aiken, and Kahle, 2002).
One can argue that this may occur because the
celebrity endorser lacked identification and per-
ceived familiarity with the target market.
Perhaps one of the most important and sought
after target markets for advertisers today is one
that represents great potential yet considerable
challenges—teenagers. Currently, teenagers have
been classified as a part of Generation Y—those
individuals born between 1977 and 1994. A recent
issue of the Journal of Advertising Research (2001,
Vol. 41, No. 5) highlighted and identified the
potential and yet resistance of Generation Y to
ALAN J. BUSH
University of Memphis
alanbush@memphis.edu
CRAIG A. MARTIN
University of Western
Kentucky
craig.martin@wku.edu
VICTORIA D. BUSH
University of
Mississippi
vbush@bus.olemiss.edu
108
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH
March 2004 DOI: 10.1017/S0021849904040206
marketing efforts. Authors in this special
issue discussed this need with a call for
more research to understand the motiva-
tions and behaviors of this important
group. This need for research may be
particularly evident in sports and sports
marketing. For years, professional sports
such as major league baseball have at-
tempted to attract a younger audience to
its declining fan base.
More recently, Sukhdial, Aiken, and
Kahle (2002) discussed the lack of re-
search on the female market for sports
marketers. Since the passage of Title 9 in
1972, a federal mandate to provide equal
athletic opportunities for men and women,
these women, of whom a large group
belong to Generation Y, represent a huge
market for sports, sports marketers, and
sports celebrities. However, this major mar-
ket may be the least researched segment
by sports organizations and sports mar-
keters. Do sports celebrity endorsers act
as role models to females? And, if so, can
they influence this segment’s intentions
and behaviors?
Hence, the objectives of this study are
to: (1) explore the concept of sports celeb-
rities as role models for Generation Y,
(2) investigate whether or not sports ce-
lebrity role models influence this gener-
ation’s intentions and behaviors, and
(3) explore the influence of sports celeb-
rity role models on female members of
Generation Y.
BACKGROUND
Wolburg and Pokrywczynski (2001) em-
phasized that the youth market is one of
the most coveted of all segments due to
their: (1) spending power, (2) ability to be
trendsetters, (3) receptivity to new prod-
ucts, and (4) tremendous potential for be-
coming lifetime customers. Conversely,
others emphasize that Generation Y is
one who is resistant to advertising efforts,
individualistic, and anticorporate (Kap-
ner, 1997; Wolburg and Pokrywczynski,
2001).
Despite these seemingly opposite per-
spectives, researchers and practitioners ar-
gue that this group is an easier target to
market to because they have grown up in a
consumer oriented society (Brand, 2000).Ac-
cording to Rob Frankel, author of The Re-
venge of Brand X (2000), “. . . Gen Y is less
rooted in traditional social mores and eth-
ics. They are easier targets, because they
have grown up in a culture of pure con-
sumerism” (as quoted in Manning-Schaffel,
2002). Because of this, “. . . they are way more
tuned into media because there is so much
more media to be tuned into” (as quoted in
Manning-Schaffel, 2002). Thus, members of
Gen Y, and in particular teen members of
this generation, represent a viable group to
study in terms of media influences.
According to the theory of consumer
socialization, as teens mature, their drive
for independence contributes to establish-
ing their own set of norms and behaviors
(Mascarenhas and Higby, 1993). Many of
these new behaviors tend to be based on
group stereotypes (Bodec, 1981; Graham
and Hamdan, 1988). In searching for their
independence, influences such as the me-
dia become very important to teenagers.
What follows is a discussion of the theo-
retical foundations for this study.
CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATION
Consumer socialization
Consumer socialization is the process by
which “young people acquire skills, knowl-
edge, and attitudes relevant to their func-
tioning as consumers in the marketplace”
(Ward, 1974, p. 1). Consumer socialization
emphasizes sources of influence or “so-
cialization agents” that transmit norms,
attitudes, motivations, and behaviors to
the learner (Moschis and Churchill, 1978).
A socialization agent may be any person
or organization directly involved with the
individual. Socialization agents com-
monly used in the literature include par-
ents, peers, mass media, school, and
television viewing.
The concept of consumer socialization has
been utilized to determine, among other
things, how consumers learn thought pro-
cesses and consumption behaviors through
modeling (Moschis and Churchill, 1978).
Role models can be anyone the individual
consumer comes in contact with who can
potentially influence the consumer’s con-
sumption decisions (Bandura, 1977). From
this conceptual definition of role models, it
is obvious that parents, teachers, peers, or
relatives can all be considered role models.
In fact, many recent research studies have
analyzed how parents and/or peers influ-
ence the consumption attitudes of individ-
ual consumers (Bush, Smith, and Martin,
1999; Carlson, Walsh, Laczniak, and Gross-
bart, 1994; Keillor, Parker, and Schaefer, 1996;
Laczniak, Muehling, and Carlson, 1995).
Many research studies, however, have
not specifically investigated the impact of
role models with which the adolescent
has little or no direct contact. A recent
study examining the impact of role mod-
els on the self-views of young adults rec-
ognized that “individuals of outstanding
achievement can serve as role models to
others,” motivating young adults to adopt
certain self-images and lifestyle patterns
(Lockwood and Kunda, 1997, p. 91). In-
cluded in this category of role models
would be models from electronic or print
media that influence consumer consump-
tion attitudes and patterns without ever
directly contacting or meeting the con-
sumer. These role models are the vicarious
role models acknowledged by Bandura
(1986). Thus, a role model for an adoles-
cent can be anyone the individual comes
in contact with, either directly or indi-
rectly, that potentially can influence the
individual’s consumption decisions
(Bandura, 1977).
GEN Y SPORTS CELEBRITY INFLUENCE
March 2004
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH
109
Research has examined the impact of
vicarious role models on a variety of dif-
ferent dependent variables. For example,
the influence of television role models has
been examined in terms of their impact
on adolescent occupational goals (Chris-
tiansen, 1979) and career aspirations (King
and Multon, 1996). Even superstars have
been analyzed to determine if they influ-
enced the self-views of young adults (Lock-
wood and Kunda, 1997). Overall, the
general consensus of these studies indi-
cates that vicarious role models can be
socialization agents and can have a signif-
icant effect on the career aspirations, ed-
ucational choices, and the self-views of
young adults.
Vicarious role models:
The celebrity athlete
Sports and entertainment marketing is one
of the fastest growing industries in the coun-
try today. Sports marketing experts indi-
cate that major advertising agencies are
expanding their services to include provid-
ing sports marketing and sponsorship op-
portunities for their clients (Bonham, 1998).
A large and very visible part of sports mar-
keting is the vicarious role model or the
celebrity athlete spokesperson.
Celebrity athlete endorsement has been
a topic of great interest to many organiza-
tions. Seemingly, advertisers are choosing
larger-than-life sports heroes as spokespeo-
ple for their products (Brooks and Harris,
1998; Sukhdial, Aiken, and Kahle, 2002).
Some of the most recognized advertising
spokespeople today are sports celebrities
such as Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Sha-
quille O’Neal, Nolan Ryan, George Fore-
man, and Mia Hamm, just to name a few.
Historically, there have been several
theoretical explanations for the wide-
spread use of celebrity spokespeople. For
example, researchers have suggested that
celebrity endorsers may be influential be-
cause they are viewed as highly dynamic
and they have attractive and likable qual-
ities (Atkin and Block, 1983). Friedman
and Friedman (1979) proposed that celeb-
rity spokespeople can add value to the
endorsed product due to a combination
of the physical attractiveness and status
of the athlete. Finally, McCracken (1986)
has theorized that celebrity endorsers can
transfer cultural meaning from the celeb-
rity to the advertised product.
Although these theoretical explanations
have increased our understanding of ce-
lebrity spokespeople and have added to the
body of knowledge on celebrity endorse-
ments, none have assessed the impact of
celebrity endorsements on adolescent con-
sumers. Thus, consumer socialization is a
theoretical foundation that can provide a
setting to assess the influence that a vicar-
ious role model such as a celebrity athlete
would have on an adolescent. From this
theoretical perspective, it is hypothesized
that a celebrity athlete will act as a social-
ization agent in a teenager’s consumer so-
cialization process.
Behavioral intentions: Outcomes of
socialization
The end result of the socialization process
is based on the learning of consumer be-
haviors and is termed “outcomes” or con-
sumer skills. Behavioral intentions is an
outcome of socialization that may be of
particular importance to advertisers be-
cause it is related to favorable and un-
favorable behaviors consumers may exhibit
toward a brand. For example, when con-
sumers praise the brand and express pref-
erence for one advertiser over others, these
favorable intentions may ultimately lead
to increased sales of the brand, paying
premium prices for the brand, spreading
positive word-of-mouth for the brand, etc.
Conversely, unfavorable intentions can lead
to switching brands and spreading nega-
tive word-of-mouth. Therefore, gaining a
better understanding of the behavioral in-
tentions of teenagers may help advertis-
ers better communicate to this important
target.
Traditionally, behavioral intentions have
been theorized and operationalized in a
unidimensional way rather than looking
at specific types of behaviors. In fact, sev-
eral research studies have used one- and
two-item scales to operationalize behav-
ioral intentions (cf. Anderson and Sulli-
van, 1990; Cronin and Taylor, 1992). More
recently, Zeithaml, Berry, and Parasura-
man (1996) developed a multidimen-
sional behavioral intentions construct that
included several aspects of behavioral in-
tentions that have not been incorporated
into previous research. This construct in-
cludes both favorable (i.e., word-of-mouth
communications, purchase intentions, price
sensitivity) and unfavorable (i.e., negative
word-of-mouth, complaining behavior) di-
mensions of behavioral intentions.
A multidimensional construct and mea-
sure of behavioral intentions fits well into
the socialization process for the teenage
market because it deals with facets of
behavioral intentions related to friends,
peers, and celebrity spokespeople such as
saying positive things about a company
or brand to others or recommending a
brand name to a friend. For the present
study, behavioral intentions will be de-
fined based on the following three dimen-
sions: (1) product switching or complaining
behavior, (2) favorable or positive word-
of-mouth, and (3) brand loyalty.
HYPOTHESES
Studies have found that mass media
sources are important references for teens
in selecting products (Gilkison, 1973; Mas-
carenhas and Higby, 1993). For example,
Boush, Friestad, and Rose (1994) posited
that mass media sources such as advertis-
ing would serve as a type of normative
influence to teenagers. Vicarious role mod-
els such as athletes, entertainers, etc. have
GEN Y SPORTS CELEBRITY INFLUENCE
110
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH
March 2004
also been shown to influence adolescents
(Bandura, 1986). Mascarenhas and Higby
(1993) reported that the media is one of
the most important interpersonal influenc-
ers for teenagers. Furthermore, Martin and
Bush (2000) recently suggested the vicar-
ious role models such as entertainers and
athletes can be important influencers of
teens’ lifestyles and consumption pat-
terns. Based on these findings, we would
expect vicarious role models such as ath-
letes to positively effect teens’ intentions
and behaviors. Hence, this is the basis for
the following hypotheses:
H1: Teenagers’ athlete role model in-
fluence is positively related to
product switching and complaint
behavior.
H2: Teenagers’ athlete role model in-
fluence is positively related to
favorable or positive word-of-
mouth behavior.
H3: Teenagers’ athlete role model in-
fluence is positively related to
brand loyalty.
Sports marketers are beginning to real-
ize the tremendous potential of female
members of Generation Y for sports-
related products and services. In a recent
study, the U.S. General Accounting Office
discovered that, since 1997, more women
than men participate in intercollegiate ath-
letics (Lords, 1999). Thus, an important
question for sports marketers and adver-
tisers is whether or not young women
can be influenced by sports celebrities
and if these women’s perceptions of sports
celebrities differ from those of men.
In a recent study that investigated an
attitudinal dimension of how fans iden-
tify with teams and athletes (i.e., “old-
school” or “new-school”), Sukhdial, Aiken,
and Kahle (2002) reported intriguing find-
ings concerning gender. Their findings sug-
gest that women are less “old-school” than
men when it comes to materialism. That
is, women were more likely than men to
disagree with the statement that “most pro-
fessional athletes have been too material-
istic,” “have no sense of loyalty to the
team,” and “are more interested in mak-
ing money than playing the game.” This
finding was even more evident in women
under 30 years of age (i.e., Generation Y).
Based on this finding, one can argue that,
if females are less apt than men to view
current athletes as materialistic, then young
women may be more receptive to sports
celebrity role models. Thus, this is the
basis for the following hypothesis:
H4: Female teenagers’ athlete role
model influence is more posi-
tively related to (a) product
switching and complaint behav-
ior, (b) favorable word-of-mouth
behavior, and (c) brand loyalty
than male teenagers.
METHODOLOGY
Subjects
The teenage segment of Generation Y was
the selected sample for the current study.
There has been a great deal of variation
among age ranges used in the literature
to define this important group (see Wol-
burg and Pokrywczynski, 2001 for an ex-
cellent review of these studies). Generation
Y has been described in the literature as
anyone born between the years of 1977
and 1994 (i.e., ages 8–25 years old). As a
subset of this large group, adolescents
between the ages of 13 and 18 partici-
pated in this study. As stated earlier, teen-
agers were selected for many reasons
including: (1) their sheer size, (2) they are
in the process of acquiring preferences for
products and brand loyalties, (3) they will
spend a lot of money in the future, and
(4) they tend to be trendsetters for each
other as well as the general population.
Perhaps most importantly, teens were se-
lected for this study because teenagers
are still learning and searching for their
own identity. Positive reinforcement from
outside individuals or media can re-
inforce preferences in deciding which be-
haviors, values, attitudes, and skills are
appropriate for them in a social context.
A total of 218 teenagers participated in
this study. Subjects were drawn from 70
separate high schools and junior high
schools in the midsouth United States.
Table 1 provides a brief description of the
demographic characteristics of this eco-
nomically and socially diverse sample.
Fifty-four percent were male (n 5 118)
and 46 percent were female (n 5 100).
Sixty-two percent were white, 28 percent
TABLE 1
Characteristics of Sample
Characteristic Frequency Percent
...........................................................................
Gender
Males 118 54%
...........................................................................
Females 100 46%
...........................................................................
Ethnicity
Caucasian 135 62%
...........................................................................
African American 61 28%
...........................................................................
Asian 11 5%
...........................................................................
Hispanic 3 1%
...........................................................................
Other 8 4%
...........................................................................
Age
13 years 18 8%
...........................................................................
14 years 25 11%
...........................................................................
15 years 28 13%
...........................................................................
16 years 57 26%
...........................................................................
17 years 69 32%
...........................................................................
18 years 21 10%
...........................................................................
GEN Y SPORTS CELEBRITY INFLUENCE
March 2004
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH
111
were black, 5 percent were Asian, and the
remaining 5 percent classified themselves
as other ethnic backgrounds.
Measures
The scales utilized in the present study
measure teenagers’ athlete role model per-
ceptions in general and how these role
models may influence their consumer-
related behavioral intentions. These scales
are provided in the Appendix.
Role model influence. Athlete role model
influence was assessed using an adapted
version of the Rich (1997) role model scale.
This scale asks specifically how one’s fa-
vorite role model influences the respon-
dent’s behavior in general as well as others.
This measurement device asks the respon-
dent’s level of agreement to such state-
ments as “my favorite athlete exhibits the
kind of work ethic and behavior I try to
imitate” and “my favorite athlete sets a pos-
itive example for others to follow.” The ath-
lete role model scale included five items
and utilized a 7-point strongly disagree to
strongly agree continuum. The reliability
coefficient of this scale was a 5 .93.
Intentions and behaviors. Consumer-
related behavioral intentions were mea-
sured utilizing an adapted version of the
Zeithaml, Berry, and Parasuraman (1996)
purchase intentions scale. This 12-item
scale, anchored by a 7-point strongly dis-
agree to strongly agree continuum, pro-
vides responses to a variety of purchase
and behavioral intention questions. Be-
cause we are specifically interested in ath-
lete role models, we adapted each item of
the scale to include specific reference to
“my favorite athlete.” Thus, the final scale
included items such as “my favorite ath-
lete influences me to recommend prod-
ucts or brands to someone who seeks my
advice” and “my favorite athlete influ-
ences me to buy fewer products from
certain companies.” All items are pre-
sented in the Appendix.
Three methods (exploratory factor analy-
sis, Cronbach’s alpha, and confirmatory
factor analysis) were used to select and
assess the final items that would be used
to measure the dependent variable of pur-
chase intentions and behavior. Explor-
atory factor analysis was first conducted
to examine whether the items produced
the three proposed factors and whether
the individual items loaded on the in-
tended factors. Factor analysis with a var-
imax rotation was conducted on all 12
items of the scale. As proposed, three
distinct factors emerged and were la-
beled: favorable word-of-mouth (three
items, a 5 .91), complaining and switch-
ing behavior (six items, a 5 .90), and
brand loyalty or price insensitivity (three
items, a 5 .81). The three factors ex-
plained nearly 70 percent of the variance
(69.63 percent), and each had alpha val-
ues exceeding .80, yielding factors accept-
able for theory testing research (Churchill,
1979; Gerbing and Anderson, 1988).
Confirmatory factor analysis. Finally, con-
firmatory factor analysis was conducted
to assess the multidimensionality of the
behavioral intentions scale. We subjected
the data to a confirmatory factor analysis
using LISREL 8.30 (Joreskog and Sor-
bom, 1999). Considered a more rigorous
test than exploratory factor analysis, con-
firmatory factor analysis specifies a mea-
surement model a priori to restrict the
possible number of factors in the solu-
tion (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). As
seen in Table 2, the standardized param-
eter estimate results of the confirmatory
factor analysis provide strong support
TABLE 2
Standardized Parameter Estimates using Confirmatory Factor
Analysis: Behavioral Intentions Scale
Factor
.......................................................................................................
Item
Switching/Complaint
Behavior
Positive
W-O-M
Brand
Loyalty
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 1 .91
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 2 .93
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 3 .81
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 4 .78
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 5 .81
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 6 .91
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 7 .80
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 8 .78
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 9 .84
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 10 .77
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 11 .78
.............................................................................................................................................................
Item 12 .75
.............................................................................................................................................................
GEN Y SPORTS CELEBRITY INFLUENCE
112
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH
March 2004
for the original 3-factor structure of the
behavioral intentions scale.
Although the fit of the model is signif-
icant ( p , .01) with a chi-square value of
136.9 and 51 degrees of freedom, other
model statistics indicate that the pro-
posed 3-factor structure provides parsimo-
nious fit of the model to the data. Initially,
all of the standardized parameter esti-
mates shown in Table 2 are greater than
or equal to .75, indicating significant ex-
plained variance from each item. Addi-
tionally, the goodness of fit index is .91,
the root-mean-squared residual is .04, the
incremental fit index is .95, and the normed
fit index is .93. All of these fit statistics
indicate that overall model fit is accept-
able for social science research (Bagozzi
and Yi, 1988).
RESULTS
We used regression analysis to test the
hypothesized effects of the independent
variable (athlete role model influence) on
each of the three purchase intentions and
behavior dimensions. What follows is a
discussion of three regression analyses—
one for each behavioral intention out-
come (i.e., dependent variable) as shown
in Table 3.
We tested Hypothesis H1 by using the
regression model presented in Table 3. The
results show that teens’ athlete role model
influence ( p . .05) is not significantly re-
lated to product switching or complaining
behavior. Thus, Hypothesis H1 is not sup-
ported. Our second hypothesis (H2), how-
ever, is supported. The results in Table 3
show that athlete role model influence (b 5
.307, p , .0001) is positively related to teen-
agers’ favorable word-of-mouth commu-
nications. The final regression equation
presented in Table 3 was used to test Hy-
pothesis H3. Again, the results show that
athlete role model influence (b 5 .187, p ,
.006) is positively related to teenagers’ brand
loyalty. Hence Hypothesis H3 is supported.
To test our fourth hypothesis (H4), we
assessed the mean values of each behav-
ioral intention scale item by gender (118
males, 100 females). These results are re-
ported in Table 4. Based on previous find-
ings, we had hypothesized that females
would report more positive results than
males when it comes to the amount of
influence athlete role models have on their
behavioral intentions. We found partial
support for this hypothesis.
More specifically, Hypothesis H4a is
not supported. There appears to be no
significant differences between male and
female members of Generation Y when it
comes to athlete role model influence on
product switching and complaint behav-
ior. We did find support for Hypothesis
H4b. For each item in the factor of Pos-
itive W-O-M, significant differences exist
between males and females. As shown in
Table 4, on a scale where 1 5 strongly
disagree and 7 5 strongly agree, females
had significantly higher responses to each
item. Thus, females are in stronger agree-
ment that their favorite athlete role mod-
els influence them to say positive things
about a product/brand, recommend
products/brands to others, and encour-
age friends or relatives to by certain prod-
ucts or brands. As for Hypothesis H4c,
we again found partial support. Here, a
significant difference exists between males
(mean 5 4.02) and females (mean 5 4.75)
when it comes to athlete role model in-
fluence on buying certain brands. How-
ever, no differences were found on the
other two items that make up this factor
of brand loyalty.
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
Our findings from this study suggest sev-
eral interesting implications for advertis-
ing researchers and practitioners. Although
previous research on adolescents has ex-
plained how this group relies on various
socialization agents in developing such
consumer behaviors as attitudes toward
advertising, skepticism toward advertis-
ing, and self-views, the present study may
shed some more light on the actual inten-
tions or behaviors of this important and
growing target market.
Perhaps the most interesting finding of
our study is that celebrity sports athletes
have a positive influence on adolescents’
favorable word-of-mouth and brand loy-
alty. This suggests that celebrity sports
athletes are important to adolescents when
they make brand choices and talk about
these brands positively. The public press
has recently debated the issue of whether
or not professional athletes are role mod-
els to children and young adults. In fact,
much of this controversy was brought
about several years ago in a Nike com-
TABLE 3
Regression Results of Role Model Perceptions on
Behavioral Intentions
Predictor: Athlete
Role Model
Standardized Beta
Coefficient Adj. r
2
t-value Sign. Level
.............................................................................................................................................................
Dependent variable
Complaining behavior .107 .007 1.583 .115
.............................................................................................................................................................
Positive word-of-mouth .307 .090 4.741 .000
.............................................................................................................................................................
Brand loyalty .187 .031 2.802 .006
.............................................................................................................................................................
GEN Y SPORTS CELEBRITY INFLUENCE
March 2004
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH
113
mercial featuring NBA basketball player
Charles Barkley. In the commercial, Bark-
ley stated bluntly that, “I’m not a role
model.” Though the controversy contin-
ues, the results of our study suggest that,
regardless of their public behavior, teen-
agers do consider athletes as important
role models.
Our findings also reveal some initial
insights into differences between male and
female members of Generation Y. As stated
previously, there has been a relative lack
of research on the female market for sports
marketers (Sukhdial, Aiken, and Kahle,
2002). Our findings revealed some inter-
esting initial insights about this under-
researched market and, more specifically,
about female teens. We found that fe-
males in our sample may spread more
positive word-of-mouth about a product
or brand that is endorsed by their favorite
celebrity athlete than males. Further, we
also found that females agreed more than
Perhaps the most interesting finding of our study is that
celebrity sports athletes have a positive influence on
adolescents’ favorable word-of-mouth and brand loyalty.
TABLE 4
Test of Mean Values* of Athlete Role Model Influence on Behavioral Intention Items
by Gender
Factors/Item Descriptors
...........................................................................................................
My favorite athlete influences me to: Females Males T-Value Sign. Level
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Switching and complaining behavior
Buy fewer products from certain companies. 3.45 3.53 0.33 .740
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Take some of my purchases to other businesses that offer better prices. 3.64 3.73 0.37 .708
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Switch to a competitor if I experience a problem with a company’s service. 3.69 3.56 −0.52 .604
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Complain to other customers if I experience a problem with a company’s
service. 3.29 3.20 −0.36 .722
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Complain to external agencies if I experience problems with a company’s
service. 3.15 3.19 0.15 .883
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Complain to a company’s employees if I see a problem with that company’s
service. 3.42 3.33 −0.37 .714
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Positive W-O-M
Say positive things about products or brands to other people. 4.81 3.96 −3.48 .001
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Recommend products or brands to someone who seeks my advice. 4.59 3.80 −3.31 .001
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Encourage friends or relatives to buy certain products or brands. 5.07 3.26 −8.26 .000
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Brand loyalty
Continue to do business with a certain company even if it increases its prices. 3.63 3.45 −0.74 .462
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Pay more for products at one business even though I could buy them cheaper
elsewhere. 3.45 3.18 −1.11 .268
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Buy certain brands. 4.75 4.02 −2.75 .006
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
*Mean values based on a 1- to 7-point scale where 1 5 strongly disagree and 7 5 strongly agree.
GEN Y SPORTS CELEBRITY INFLUENCE
114
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH
March 2004
males that athlete role models influence
them to buy certain brands—this is a key
insight for marketers seeking to develop
brand loyalty among women at an early
age. More information should be gath-
ered on who female members of Genera-
tion Y perceive as athlete role models and
how this group spreads word-of-mouth.
Overall, the implication from our study
for advertisers is that, if they are targeting
teenagers, athletes may be considered as
spokespeople for their products. Athletes
are role models to many teenagers and they
look up to them for what’s “cool” in prod-
ucts and brands. According to Zollo (1995),
sports participation and interest are at an
all time high for both teen boys and girls.
Nearly three-quarters of teens play some
type of sports in a given week, including
two-thirds of girls. Sports are “in” for most
teenagers. Some of the most “in” athletes
among teens today include Kobe Bryant,
Tiger Woods, Shaquille O’Neal, Venus and
Serena Williams, “Stone Cold” Steve Aus-
tin, Anna Kournikova, “The Rock,” and
Gabrielle Reece, just to name a few. Hence,
sports celebrities are a natural for teen ad-
vertising and promotions.
Future research is needed to further
understand the particular type of influ-
ence these athletes have on teens as well
as other target markets. For example, sev-
eral of the hottest celebrity athletes are
not exactly “role models” for positive be-
havior. But, then again, it depends upon
how positive behavior is defined in the
target market. Sukhdial, Aiken, and Kahle
(2002) recently discussed “old school” ver-
sus “new school” sports fan orientation.
An old school orientation basically is one
that focuses “not on winning but how
you play the game.” A new school orien-
tation focuses on “winning at any cost.”
Indeed, many of the celebrity athletes to-
day are considered new school—they win
at any cost, make exorbitant salaries, and
are sometimes coveted by young people
for their rebel behavior on and off the
field (Burton, Farrelly, and Quester, 2001;
Sukhdial, Aiken, and Kahle, 2002). Future
research could focus on investigating teens’
sports fan orientation, uncover who these
“new school” athletes are, and investigate
how these role models impact teens’
values.
CONCLUSION
Teenagers represent an enormous market
for advertisers. Athlete role models are
perceived as important influencers to
teens. These influencers are not only im-
portant in helping spread positive word-
of-mouth about a product or brand, but
also for enhancing brand loyalty. It is
extremely important that advertising man-
agers understand the impact of these ce-
lebrity athletes and consider utilizing these
influencers in their messages.
................................................................................................
A
LAN
J. B
USH
(Ph.D., Louisiana State University) is
professor of marketing at the University of Memphis.
His research interests include sports marketing, con-
sumer socialization of teenagers and young adults,
service marketing, and sales force research. He has
published his research in the Journal of Marketing
Research, the Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, the Journal of Advertising Research, the Jour-
nal of Business Research, the Journal of Advertising,
the Journal of Retailing, the Journal of Personal Selling
& Sales Management, Industrial Marketing Manage-
ment, the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, the
Journal of Services Marketing, and others. Dr. Bush is
a past president of the Southern Marketing Associa-
tion and has published several textbooks in the sales
management area.
................................................................................................
C
RAIG
M
ARTIN
(Ph.D., University of Memphis) is assis-
tant professor of marketing at Western Kentucky Uni-
versity. His research focuses on sales and sales
management, the consumer socialization of adoles-
cents, sports marketing, and advertising to adoles-
cents. Dr. Martin has had research accepted for
publication in the Journal of Advertising Research, the
Journal of Advertising, the Journal of Consumer Market-
ing, the Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing,
the Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Market-
ing Management Journal, and multiple national and
regional conferences.
................................................................................................
V
ICTORIA
B
USH
(Ph.D., University of Memphis) is asso-
ciate professor of marketing at the University of Mis-
sissippi. Her research interests include advertising
issues, intercultural communication, public policy, and
sales management. She has published in such jour-
nals as the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sci-
ence, the Journal of Advertising Research, the Journal
of Advertising, Industrial Marketing Management, the
Journal of Services Marketing, and others.
REFERENCES
Anderson, Eugene W., and Mary W. Sulli-
van. “Customer Satisfaction and Retention
Across Firms,” TIMS College of Marketing Spe-
cial Interest Conference on Services Marketing,
Nashville, TN, 1990.
Anderson, James C., and David W. Gerbing.
“Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A
[W]e . . . found that females agreed more than males
that athlete role models influence them to buy certain
brands—this is a key insight for marketers seeking to
develop brand loyalty among women at an early age.
GEN Y SPORTS CELEBRITY INFLUENCE
March 2004
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH
115
Review and Recommended Two-Step Ap-
proach.” Psychological Bulletin 103, 3 (1988):
411–23.
Atkin, Charles, and Martin Block. “Effec-
tiveness of Celebrity Endorsers.” Journal of Ad-
vertising Research 23, 1 (1983): 57–61.
Bagozzi, Richard P., and Youjae Yi. “On the
Evaluation of Structural Equation Models.” Jour-
nal of the Academy of Marketing Science 16, 1
(1988): 74–94.
Bandura, Albert. Social Learning Theory. En-
glewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1977.
–——. Social Foundations of Thought and Action:
A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall, 1986.
Bodec, Ben. “Marketing Paradox: Fewer Teens,
More Spending.” Marketing and Media Decisions
16, 4 (1981): 76–78.
Bonham, Dean. “You May Know About Sports,
or Marketing, But Do You Know About Sports
Marketing?” The Commercial Appeal, November
29, 1998.
Boush, David M., Marian Friestad, and Greg-
ory M. Rose. “Adolescent Skepticism toward
TV Advertising and Knowledge of Advertiser
Tactics.” Journal of Consumer Research 21, 1 (1994):
165–75.
Brand, Rachel. “Advertisers Examine Teens
and Their Spending Clout”: [URL: http://
www.tcpalm.com/business/01jteenu.shtml],
2000.
Brooks, Christine M., and Kellee K. Harris.
“Celebrity Athlete Endorsements: An Over-
view of the Key Theoretical Issues.” Sports Mar-
keting Quarterly 7, 2 (1998): 34–44.
Burton, Rick, Francis John Farrelly, and
Pascale Quester. “Exploring the Curious De-
mand for Athletes with Controversial Image:
A Review of Anti-Hero Product Endorsement
Advertising.” Sports Marketing & Sponsorship 2,
1 (2001): 315–29.
Bush, Alan J., Rachel Smith, and Craig A.
Martin. “The Influence of Consumer Social-
ization Variables on Attitude toward Advertis-
ing: A Comparison of African Americans and
Caucasians.” Journal of Advertising 28, 3 (1999):
13–24.
Carlson, Les, Ann Walsh, Russell N. Lacz-
niak, and Sanford Grossbart. “Family Com-
munication Patterns and Marketplace
Motivations, Attitudes, and Behaviors of Chil-
dren and Mothers.” Journal of Consumer Affairs
28, 1 (1994): 25–53.
Christiansen, John B. “Television Role Mod-
els and Adolescent Occupational Goals.” Hu-
man Communication Research 5, 3 (1979): 335–37.
Churchill, Gilbert A. “A Paradigm for De-
veloping Better Measures of Marketing Con-
structs.” Journal of Marketing Research 16, 1 (1979):
64–73.
Cronin, Joseph J., and Steven A. Taylor. “Mea-
suring Service Quality: A Re-examination and
Extension.” Journal of Marketing 56, 3 (1992):
55–68.
Frankel, Rob. Revenge of Brand X. New York:
Frankel and Anderson, Inc., 2000.
Friedman, Hershey H., and Linda W. Fried-
man. “Endorser Effectiveness by Product Type.”
Journal of Advertising Research 19, 5 (1979): 63–71.
Gerbing, David W., and James C. Anderson.
“An Updated Paradigm for Scale Development
Incorporating Unidimensionality and Its As-
sessment.” Journal of Marketing Research 25, 2
(1988): 186–92.
Gilkison, Paul. “Teenagers’ Perceptions of Buy-
ing Frames of Reference: A Decade of Retro-
spect.” Journal of Retailing 49, 2 (1973): 25–37.
Graham, Lawrence, and Lawrence Ham-
dan. “Youth Trends: Capturing the $200 Billion
Youth Market.” Children Today 17, 2 (1988): 29–31.
Jones, Melinda J., and David W. Schumann.
“The Strategic Use of Celebrity Athlete Endors-
ers in Sports Illustrated: An Historic Perspec-
tive.” Sport Marketing Quarterly 9, 2 (2000): 65–76.
Joreskog, Karl, and Dag Sorbom. LISREL
8.30, Scientific Software International Inc., 1999.
Kapner, Suzanne. “Understanding,” Restau-
rant Business, July 15, 1997.
Keillor, Bruce D., Stephen R. Parker, and
Allen Schaefer. “Influences on Adolescent
Brand Preferences in the United States and
Mexico.” Journal of Advertising Research 36, 3
(1996): 47–56.
King, Michelle M., and Karen D. Multon.
“The Effects of Television Role Models on the
Career Aspirations of African American Junior
High School Students.” Journal of Career Devel-
opment 23, 2 (1996): 111–25.
Laczniak, Russell N., Darrel D. Muehling,
and Les Carlson. “Mothers’ Attitudes toward
900-Number Advertising Directed at Chil-
dren.” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 14, 1
(1995): 108–16.
Lockwood, Penelope, and Ziva Kunda.
“Superstars and Me: Predicting the Impact of
Role Models on the Self.” Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 73, 1 (1997): 91–103.
Lords, Erik. “More Women and Fewer Men
Participate in Intercollegiate Athletics, Study
Finds.” The Chronicle of Higher Education 45, 44
(1999): A40.
GEN Y SPORTS CELEBRITY INFLUENCE
116
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH
March 2004
Manning-Schaffel, Vivian. “Generation Y”:
[URL: http://www.brandchannel.com/start1.
asp?id5136], 2002.
Martin, Craig A., and Alan J. Bush. “Do
Role Models Influence Teenagers’ Purchase In-
tentions and Behaviors?” Journal of Consumer
Marketing 17, 5 (2000): 441–54.
Mascarenhas, Oswald A., and Mary A. Higby.
“Peer, Parent, and Media Influences in Teen
Apparel Shopping.” Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science 21, 1 (1993): 53–58.
McCracken, Grant. “Culture and Consump-
tion: A Theoretical Account of the Structure
and Movement of the Cultural Meaning of
Consumer Goods.” Journal of Consumer Re-
search 13, 1 (1986): 71–84.
Miciak, Alan R., and William L. Shanklin.
“Choosing Celebrity Endorsers.” Marketing Man-
agement 3, 3 (1994): 51–58.
Moschis, George, and Gilbert A. Churchill,
Jr. “Consumer Socialization: A Theoretical and
Empirical Analysis.” Journal of Marketing Re-
search 15, 4 (1978): 599–609.
Pulley, Brett. “Top of the Lineup—Derek Jeter
is Must-See TV.” Forbes, March 19, 2001.
Rich, Gregory A. “The Sales Manager as a
Role Model: Effects on Trust, Job Satisfaction,
and Performance of Salespeople.” Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science 25, 4 (1997): 319–28.
Sukhdial, Ajay S., Damon Aiken, and Lynn
Kahle. “Are You Old School? A Scale for Mea-
suring Sports Fans’ Old-School Orientation.”
Journal of Advertising Research 42, 4 (2002): 71–81.
Ward, Scott. “Consumer Socialization.” Jour-
nal of Consumer Research 1, 2 (1974): 1–16.
Wolburg, Joyce M., and James Pokrywczyn-
ski. “A Psychographic Analysis of Generation
Y. ” Journal of Advertising Research 41, 5 (2001):
33–53.
Zeithaml, Valarie A., Leonard L. Berry, and
A. Parasuraman. “The Behavioral Conse-
quences of Service Quality.” Journal of Market-
ing 60, 2 (1996): 31–46.
Zollo, Peter. Wise Up to Teens. Ithaca, NY:
New Strategists Publications, Inc., 1995.
GEN Y SPORTS CELEBRITY INFLUENCE
March 2004
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH
117
APPENDIX
Measures of Constructs
Role Model Influence (Rich, 1997)
My favorite athlete . . .
1. provides a good model for me to follow.
2. leads by example.
3. sets a positive example for others to follow.
4. exhibits the kind of work ethic and behavior that I try to imitate.
5. acts as a role model for me.
Purchase Intentions (Zeithaml, Berry, and Parasuraman, 1996)
The opinions of my favorite athlete influence me to . . .
1. say positive things about products or brands to other people.
2. recommend products or brands to someone who seeks my advice.
3. encourage friends or relatives to buy certain products or brands.
4. buy fewer products from certain companies.
5. take some of my purchases to other businesses that offer better prices.
6. continue to do business with a certain company even if it increases its prices.
7. pay more for products at one business even though I could buy them cheaper elsewhere.
8. switch to a competitor if I experience a problem with a company’s service.
9. complain to other customers if I experience a problem with a company’s service.
10. complain to external agencies, such as the Better Business Bureau, if I experience problems with a company’s service.
11. complain to a company’s employees if I see a problem with that company’s service.
12. buy certain brands.
GEN Y SPORTS CELEBRITY INFLUENCE
118
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH
March 2004
