Exploring third-party’s brand rankings from consumers’ persuasion knowledge

Abstract

Purpose

Given the importance of third-party endorsements as external cues during purchase evaluations, the manipulation of endorsements may raise consumers’ suspicion and thereby reduce the effectiveness of marketing messages. Consumers find it increasingly difficult to distinguish between authentic and biased brand reviews. This research conducts two experiments regarding brand rankings of third-parties in four industries. Study 1 aims to probes the interaction effect of persuasion knowledge and fairness of rating method (fair vs. unfair) on brand rankings’ credibility and brand image enhancement. Study 2 examines the interplay of dispositional persuasion knowledge and reputation of third parties (high vs. low).

Design/methodology/approach

This research builds on an analysis of data (Study 1, N = 122; Study 2, N = 123) from Taiwan, where brand rankings held by third-party organizations are regular. The hypotheses were tested using SPSS’s PROCESS macro.

Findings

Drawing on previous research of persuasion knowledge, the authors find that a fair rating method and a high reputation of third-party organization can mitigate the negative effect of persuasion knowledge.

Practical implications

The results of this research suggest that marketers need to manage third-party endorsements carefully. Consumer skepticism toward these endorsements (e.g. third-party’s brand rankings) can be weakened when persuasion attempt is considered appropriate.

Originality/value

This is one of the first efforts to empirically explore the influences of persuasion knowledge on third-party endorsements. The importance of this work is underscored by the fact that a growing number of third-party endorsements are sponsored or even manipulated by brand owners.

Citation

Huang, L.-S., Huang, W.-J. and Lin, H.-Y. (2023), "Exploring third-party’s brand rankings from consumers’ persuasion knowledge", Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 95-109. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-11-2021-0391