Short answer: A character can make an ad distinctive or help people engage with a low-involvement product, but it is not a shortcut to trust. Give the character a job in the story, then test that job against an execution without the character.

The evidence is specific. In a 2019 advergaming experiment, Choi varied whether a character appeared and whether the product was high or low involvement. Character presence was associated with more brand trust and purchase intention in the low-involvement condition; for the high-involvement product, character absence performed better. This was a game context, so the result should not be generalized directly to every website or campaign.

A separate 2008 between-subjects print-ad experiment compared a cartoon spokesperson with a human spokesperson in the same ad. The cartoon version produced more positive ad and brand attitudes and purchase intention in that tested setting. It does not show that any mascot beats a product demonstration, or that the effect lasts over years of repeated use. Together, the studies justify testing a character in a relevant execution, not buying one because characters “always work.”

Give the character a role before a face

Write one sentence describing what the figure does that a product photograph or human presenter cannot. Possibilities include guiding a user through a process, making a hard topic approachable, linking otherwise separate campaign episodes, or giving a recurring signpost to a family of services. If the answer is only “adds personality,” try the concept without a mascot first.

Then set boundaries: what the figure knows, can say, and must never imply; where it appears; how it behaves in still, motion, and interactive formats; and who approves new poses or scripts. A character that appears in a film, website, and event installation needs more than one illustrated pose. It needs a small behavior and expression system.

Test the character against a real alternative

Make two comparable rough executions with the same offer and call to action: one with the character and one using a product, person, or graphic device. Show them to people in the intended audience and ask what they understood, remembered, and would do next. Watch for a familiar failure: people describe the mascot but cannot explain the service. If the character helps the story, keep it; if it competes with the product, revise or remove it.

Also price the continuing work: illustration, animation, localization, new scenarios, and brand governance. A character becomes a recurring asset, not just a one-time logo add-on. ARCHV's interactive and campaign work can use this decision process when a character has a useful role across channels. The choice should follow the communication task rather than a presumed universal effect from mascot research.