Drawing on source credibility theory, the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), match-up theory, and the meaning transfer model, this study examines how endorser type (celebrity vs. expert) and message appeal (humorous vs. rational) jointly shape advertising credibility and a set of consumer responses, namely brand recall, brand attitude, and purchase intention, in golf equipment advertising, a high-involvement and performance-driven context.
Using a 2 × 2 between-subjects experimental design with 177 active golfers, the study tests the direct, mediating, and interactive effects of endorsement cues on cognitive (brand recall), affective (brand attitude), and behavioral (purchase intention) outcomes.
The results indicate that endorser type and message appeal do not exert significant direct effects on these consumer responses. Instead, advertising credibility emerges as the central mediating mechanism explaining consumer responses. Interaction analyses show that credibility and persuasive effectiveness are maximized under conditions of endorser–appeal congruence, with expert–rational pairings outperforming all other combinations. Mediation and moderated mediation tests further demonstrate that credibility explains the indirect effects of endorser type on all outcomes, particularly when informational congruence is high.
From a managerial perspective, the findings suggest that in performance-oriented markets, expertise and rational messaging are more effective than fame and humor in generating credible and persuasive brand communication.
The study advances endorsement theory by conceptualizing advertising credibility as a process variable that links message cues to cognitive, affective, and behavioral consumer responses. It further integrates match-up theory and the ELM within a high-involvement, technical consumption context.
