The DOI matches its Crossref record; 105 of the 110 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 2 of the 29 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development and Validation
Open accessAbstract
In the last three decades, an influential research stream has emerged which highlights the dynamics of focal consumer/brand relationships. Specifically, more recently the ‘consumer brand engagement’ (CBE) concept has been postulated to more comprehensively reflect the nature of consumers’ particular interactive brand relationships, relative to traditional concepts, including ‘involvement.’ However, despite the growing scholarly interest regarding the undertaking of marketing research addressing ‘engagement,’ studies have been predominantly exploratory in nature, thus generating a lack of empirical research in this area to date. By developing and validating a CBE scale in specific social media settings, we address this identified literature gap. Specifically, we conceptualize CBE as a consumer's positively valenced brand-related cognitive, emotional and behavioral activity during or related to focal consumer/brand interactions. We derive three CBE dimensions, including cognitive processing, affection, and activation. Within three different social media contexts, we employ exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to develop a reliable, 10-item CBE scale, which we proceed to validate within a nomological net of conceptual relationships and a rival model. The findings suggest that while consumer brand ‘involvement’ acts as a CBE antecedent, consumer ‘self-brand connection’ and ‘brand usage intent’ represent key CBE consequences, thus providing a platform for further research…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
49 Own result · 21 Own interpretation · 9 No full text of the sources · 8 Sources not found · 8 Own method · 7 No basis given · 2 Couldn’t confirm · 1 Not checked yet · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“the qualitative study shows consumer conceptions of CBE are aligned with key findings addressing the 'engagement' concept in prior research (Brodie et al. 2011;Leeflang 2011).”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 2 about here
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Brodie et al. 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Could not verifycites Leeflang 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The available Abstract describes the formalization of marketing and future developments, while the metadata lists customer engagement only as a keyword. Searches for consumer conceptions of CBE, qualitative findings, and the engagement concept found no passage addressing whether those conceptions align with prior research. (LLM, conf=0.71)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In an additional EFA including only the 10 retained CBE items, the scree plot and the eigen values exceeding 1.0 concurred in suggesting the suitability of a threefactor solution for CBE, which explained 69.63% of the total variance.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Results
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For these brands, the respondents exhibited a substantially lower willingness to exert cognitive, emotional or behavioral activity in their brand interactions”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 2 about here
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“we observed the scree in the scree plot at three factors; thus corresponding to our hypothesized three-factor model of CBE.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Results
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Cattell 1966 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The attained Cronbach alphas for the scale were: (i) Cognitive processing: .825;”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fit statistics for the re-estimated model were as follows: χ 2 (53) = 464.9(p=0.000); and χ 2 /df = 8.72, GFI = .865;CFI = .922;RMSEA = .118;and SRMR = .048;thus indicating a worse fit, relative to the three-factor model.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the audio recorded findings suggested that consumers predominantly equated their 'engagement' with their selected brands to specific brand interactions.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 2 about here
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“while consumer brand 'involvement' acts as a CBE antecedent”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the results indicated that for perceived 'highly engaging' brands consumers, typically, appeared willing to exert considerable cognitive, emotional and behavioral activity in their brand interactions”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 2 about here
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We derive three CBE dimensions, including cognitive processing, affection, and activation.”
- Also stated in: § CBE Conceptual Development · plain
“we propose three CBE dimensions, which correspond to the generic cognitive, emotional and behavioral nature of 'engagement.'”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § CBE Conceptual Development · plain
- Probably not a substantial claim. 11
- It may state two separate claims as one. 14
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“As such, this research responds directly to the Marketing Science Institute's (MSI 2010), Leeflang's (2011), and Brodie et al.'s (2011) call for the undertaking of 'engagement'-based scale development research.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites MSI 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Could not verifycites Leeflang (2011) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The indexed Abstract describes a broad agenda for developing marketing research, and the keywords include customer engagement. Searches for engagement-based scale development and customer-engagement measures returned no passage in our copy calling for that research; the retrieved text does not establish the specific attribution to Leeflang. (LLM, conf=0.72)
- Not matchedcites Brodie et al. (2011)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we employ exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to develop a reliable, 10-item CBE scale”
- Also stated in: § Results · plain
“resulting in a three-factor, 10-item CBE scale for further analysis.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Abstract
plainn = 200- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Results · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The item screening generated a reduced pool of 39 CBE items.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we retained 12 items for the 'cognitive processing,' 15 items for the 'affection,' and 12 items for the 'activation' dimensions of CBE for further analysis.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Reliability (internal consistency) analyses using Cronbach's alpha indicated the scale had good reliability: (i) Cognitive processing: .753;(ii) Affection: .839;(iii) Activation: .776;and (iv) Overall 10-item CBE scale: .823.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Results
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The attained Cronbach alphas for the scale were: (i) Cognitive processing: .825;(ii) Affection: .907; (iii) Activation: .894;and (iv) Overall CBE scale: .933.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The results in Figure 1 suggested excellent model fit (Iacobucci 2010: p. 91): χ 2 (32) = 97.994(p=0.000); and χ 2 /df = 3.06.Further, GFI = .968;CFI = .984;RMSEA = .061;and SRMR = .0278;thus corroborating the excellent model fit to the data”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The regression weights (βs) for each of the items onto their intended factor were significant (e.g.AFFECTION → AFFEC.1: .895);and all standardized coefficients .50;suggesting that each of the items should remain in the model”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, while we found consumers' brand-related 'affection' (.426) and 'activation' (.402) in specific consumer/brand interactions to exert a similar significant effect on individuals' ensuing 'brand usage intent,' consumers' level of 'cognitive processing' (.045) failed to produce a significant effect.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Hypothesis Testing Results
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“which indicated that discriminant validity was attained for 14 of the 15 possible construct pairs; that is, with the exception of COG.PROC.-AFFEC.(Table 5).”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Model Results
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fornell and Larcker 1981a/b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Each of the squared multiple correlations exceeded .50;also indicating good item reliability.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Model Results
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The regression coefficients indicated that each of the items made a significant contribution to the measurement of its intended construct, thus contributing to the model's convergent validity.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Model Results
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fit statistics for the calibration sample are: χ 2 (243) = 653.561(p=0.000); and χ 2 /df = 2.69, GFI = .824;CFI = .932;RMSEA = .078;and SRMR = .0616;the validation sample: χ 2 (243) = 666.7 (p=0.000);χ 2 /df = 2.77, GFI = .817;CFI = .938;RMSEA = .079;and SRMR = .0516.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 5 about here
plainn = 278- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Highly similar results were attained across both sub-samples (Table 6), which also exhibited significant resemblance to the results for the full sample (Alwin and Jackson 1981).”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 5 about here
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Alwin and Jackson 1981
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedn = 278- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Fourth, 'engagement' plays a central role in a nomological net of focal conceptual relationships (Brodie et al. 2011)”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Table 1 about here
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Brodie et al. 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As such, study 3 confirmed the CBE scale representing a valid, reliable and stable measurement instrument.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“more recently the 'consumer brand engagement' (CBE) concept has been postulated to more comprehensively reflect the nature of consumers' particular interactive brand relationships, relative to traditional concepts, including 'involvement.'”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Brodie et al. 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“'engagement' reflects a motivational state (Van Doorn et al. 2010), which occurs by virtue of an individual's (i.e. the 'engagement subject') focal interactive experiences with a particular object or agent”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Table 1 about here
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Van Doorn et al. 2010 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“studies have been predominantly exploratory in nature; thus generating a lack of empirical research in this area to date.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and as such, may be useful for scholars and managers seeking to predict specific consumer behavior outcomes;”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, this paper contributes insights regarding the potential role of CBE in the advancement of the broader theoretical perspectives of relationship marketing, S-D logic and consumer culture theory, which are centered upon the importance of establishing and maintaining value-laden, interactive and co-creative consumer/brand interactions and relationships.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a result, consumers' CBE levels with a focal brand may fluctuate: (i) During (i.e.within) a particular brand interaction; and (ii) Across brand interactions over time.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Contributions, Limitations & Implications Academic Implications
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, we expect managerial cultivation of CBE to generate enhanced consumer brand retention and loyalty outcomes.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Managerial Implications
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Represents a promising, under-explored concept to date;”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“thus indicating that not only does CBE have a positive effect on consumer 'self-brand connection,' but CBE explains most of the variance observed for this construct.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Hypothesis Testing Results
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
The selected social media brands (Facebook.com, Twitter.com, LinkedIn.com) are representative of social media contexts for studying CBE.
“Within three different social media contexts, we employ exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to develop a reliable, 10-item CBE scale”
“we selected the brand Facebook.comfor investigation”
“we selected the social media brand Twitter.com for investigation”
The paper relies on this without support.
The causal direction is from consumer brand involvement through CBE to self-brand connection and brand usage intent, not the reverse.
“we identified a mediating effect of CBE in the association between consumer brand 'involvement' and 'brand usage intent.'”
The paper relies on this without support.
The nomological net includes all relevant mediating variables.
“which implies there are no omitted mediating variables, and the mediating hypotheses are supported.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Study 2: CBE Measurement Assessment & Scale Dimensionality
“We selected a social media setting in studies 1-3”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Study 1: Consumer Conceptions of 'Consumer Brand Engagement' (CBE)
“We instructed the participants to select a brand in any category that is 'highly engaging' to them”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“| Activation | .72 | .67 | .75 | .69 | .46 | .49 | | Self-Brand | .84 | .74 | .86 | .86 | .75 | .45 |”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
Reported 0.46 · recomputed 0.7396
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“| Affection | .84 | .85 | .76 | .57 | .74 | .46 | | Activation | .72 | .67 | .75 | .69 | .46 | .49 | | Self-Brand | .84 | .74 | .86 | .86 | .75 | .45 | | Connection | | | | | | | | Brand Usage | .67 | .64 | .74 | .70 | .67 | .76 |”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
Reported 0.46 · recomputed 0.5476
Citations
Cites
Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151312 · Cited by 109,314
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
(1975) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 36,737
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/brm.40.3.879 · Cited by 34,117
On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/bf02723327 · Cited by 26,163
Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity
Keller, K. L. (1993) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299305700101 · Cited by 24,648
Structural Equations with Latent Variables
Bollen, K. A. (1989) · Wiley series in probability and statistics · doi:10.1002/9781118619179 · Cited by 17,944
Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003 · Cited by 17,875
Structural Equations with Latent Variables.
Clogg, C. C., & Bollen, K. A. (1991) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2072165 · Cited by 17,475
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Bezjian-Avery A., 1998, Journal of Advertising Research, 38, 23
- Menard Scott Longitudinal Research, 2e, Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences No. 76 2002 Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications
- Patterson Paul, Ting Yu., De Ruyter Ko Understanding Customer Engagement in Services 2006 AZMAC Proceedings Brisbane
- Prahalad Coimbatore K., 2004, Journal of Marketing, 68, 23
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,201–1,300 of 3,233
Chu, X., Liu, Y.-Z., Chen, X.-Y., Ding, Z.-P., & Tao, S. (2020) · Electronic Commerce Research · doi:10.1007/s10660-020-09435-y
Are you engaged? The influence of brand schematicity on online brand engagement and brand purchase
Puligadda, S., Coyle, J. R., & Ni, J. Z. (2021) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-09-2019-0149 · Cited by 21
María, I., Wijaya, V., & Keni, K. (2021) · Jurnal Muara Ilmu Ekonomi dan Bisnis · doi:10.24912/jmieb.v5i2.12276 · Cited by 19
“Costumer engagement behavior intention dikenal sebagai keterlibatan customer (kognitif, emosional dan perilaku terkait brand) yang terjadi selama aktivitas atau interaksi konsumen dengan brand (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundGuan, X., Ma, W., Zhang, J., & Feng, X. (2021) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129351 · Cited by 18
Vitkauskaitė, E., & Gatautis, R. (2018) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.24251/hicss.2018.143 · Cited by 19
Symmetrical and asymmetrical approaches to brand loyalty– The case of intelligent voice assistants
He, W., Prentice, C., & Wang, X. (2024) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114850 · Cited by 18
Busalim, A. H., & Asadi, S. (2025) · Information Systems and e-Business Management · doi:10.1007/s10257-025-00700-x · Cited by 39
“Prior research has emphasized three dimensions of CE: behavioral, cognitive, and emotional (Dessart et al. 2016; Hollebeek et al. 2014).”
Qu, Y., Saffer, A. J., & Riffe, D. (2021) · Corporate Communications. An International Journal · doi:10.1108/ccij-04-2021-0046 · Cited by 15
Abbasi, A. Z., Rehman, U., Afaq, Z., Rafeh, M. A., Hlavacs, H., Mamun, M. A., & Shah, M. U. (2021) · JMIR Serious Games · doi:10.2196/30310 · Cited by 22
“Hollebeek et al [77] also suggest that the construct engagement is a multidimensional concept comprising of 3 dimensions: (1) cognitive, (2) emotional, and (3) behavioral.”
BackgroundAn exploration of the impact of gender on customer engagement
Gligor, D. M., Bozkurt, S., Welch, E., & Gligor, N. (2022) · Journal of Marketing Communications · doi:10.1080/13527266.2022.2030390 · Cited by 20
“…and Pansari (2016), future research should explore the impact of gender on the different attitudinal dimensions of customer engagement as presented by Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie (2014), and also explore additional brand-related attributes that might be directly impacted by gender differences.”
BackgroundGhonim, M. A., Elsawy, W. Z., Elsotouhy, M. M., & Khashan, M. A. (2022) · International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration · doi:10.1080/15256480.2022.2127435 · Cited by 18
“Other scholars define engagement as positive cognitive, emotional, and behavioral brand activity (e.g., Hinson et al., 2019; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundOnline brand community and consumer brand trust: Analysis from Czech millennials
Amoah, J. O., Jibril, A. B., Egala, S. B., & Keelson, S. A. (2022) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2022.2149152 · Cited by 18
“Hollebeek et al. (2014) define consumer brand engagement (CBE) as a consumer’s cognitive, emotional, behavioural, and co-creative brand-related activities related to specific interactions.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialBhattacharjee, D. R., Kuanr, A., Malhotra, N., Pradhan, D., & Moharana, T. R. (2023) · International Marketing Review · doi:10.1108/imr-09-2022-0206 · Cited by 21
Dong, C., Harrison, V. S., & Zheng, Q. (2024) · Public Relations Review · doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2023.102417 · Cited by 16
Grosso, F. O., Molina, M. Á. R., & García, J. A. C. (2024) · Tourism Management Perspectives · doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2024.101239 · Cited by 19
Virtual community engagement: Engaging virtual communities for nation branding through sports
Li, X., Johnston, K. A., & Feng, J. (2024) · Public Relations Review · doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2024.102440 · Cited by 18
Wang, Y., Ki, E., & Kim, Y. (2017) · International Journal of Strategic Communication · doi:10.1080/1553118x.2017.1280497 · Cited by 18
“In the marketing field, consumer brand engagement is defined as “a consumer’s positively valenced cognitive, emotional and behavioral brand-related activity during, or related to, specific consumer/brand interactions” (Hollebeek et al., 2014, p. 151).”
BackgroundPosts that attract millions of fans: The effect of brand-post congruence
Wang, S. S., Lin, Y.-C., & Liang, T. (2017) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2017.12.010 · Cited by 20
Achen, R. M., Kaczorowski, J., Horsmann, T., et al. (2018) · International Journal of Sport Communication · doi:10.1123/ijsc.2018-0013 · Cited by 18
La política da que hablar: "Engagement" en redes sociales de sitios de noticias
Mitchelstein, E., Leiva, S., Giuliano, C., & Boczkowski, P. J. (2018) · CIC Cuadernos de Información y Comunicación · doi:10.5209/ciyc.60913 · Cited by 18
“En este contexto, el concepto del engagement, como una medida que cuantifica el nivel de determinadas formas de “interacción” en redes sociales (Hollebeek et al., 2014; Raimondo Anselmino, 2017), aparece como relevante en el análisis sobre el consumo y la circulación de las noticias.”
BackgroundWhy Incorporating a Platform-Intermediary can Increase Crowdsourcees’ Engagement
Troll, J., Blohm, I., & Leimeister, J. M. (2018) · Business & Information Systems Engineering · doi:10.1007/s12599-018-0558-9 · Cited by 18
HOW HOTEL COMPANIES CAN FOSTER CUSTOMER SOCIABILITY BEHAVIOUR ON FACEBOOK?
Vaičiukynaitė, E., & Gatautis, R. (2018) · Journal of Business Economics and Management · doi:10.3846/jbem.2018.5691 · Cited by 18
Thota, S. C. (2018) · Academy of Marketing Studies journal · Cited by 18
Communication patterns to address the consumption of PDO products
Bonetti, E., Mattiacci, A., & Simoni, M. (2019) · British Food Journal · doi:10.1108/bfj-03-2019-0204 · Cited by 18
You Are Only Mine! Engage with Voice Assistant While Find Destinations and Accommodations
Ferreira, M. M., Correia, S., & Pereira, H. (2021) · Journal of Promotion Management · doi:10.1080/10496491.2021.1987986 · Cited by 18
“” Hollebeek et al. in 2014 also consider customer engagement as a multifaceted concept that includes aspects of affection, cognition, and behavior.”
BackgroundJohn, S. P., Walford, R., & Purayidathil, J. (2022) · FIIB Business Review · doi:10.1177/23197145211072198 · Cited by 21
“Extant research suggests that online audience engagement is a multidimensional construct with cognitive, affective and behavioural dimensions (Hollebeek et al., 2014; van Tonder & Petzer, 2018).”
Backgroundde Almeida, M. I. S., Costa, M., Coelho, R. L. F., & Scalco, P. R. (2016) · Review of Business Management · doi:10.7819/rbgn.v18i62.2620 · Cited by 18
“These activities refer to the brandrelated interactions described by the literature about brand engagement on social media, where an interactive experience between individuals and brands (Hollebeek et al., 2014) occurs.”
BackgroundFrom Advertising to Engagement
Malthouse, E. C., & Calder, B. J. (2018) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119167600.ch28 · Cited by 18
Engaging Users on Social Media Business Pages: The Roles of User Comments and Firm Responses
Cheng, X., Bala, H., & Yang, M. (2024) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2023/17621 · Cited by 23
Roy, S., & Attri, R. (2024) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/00472875241276546 · Cited by 18
“The amount of time, effort, and attention that a customer invests in brands may be considered behavioral engagement (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
Choi, S. (2025) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.2505 · Cited by 18
Engaged, but with what? Objects of engagement in technology-aided B2B customer interactions
Pöyry, E., Parvinen, P. M. T., Mattila, O., & Holopainen, J. (2020) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2020.1736603 · Cited by 23
“However, what is often claimed to be customer engagement (e.g. liking, sharing, scrolling) may only be an artefact of the person ’ s engagement with the technology, not with the brand, as pointed out by Hollebeek et al. (2014b).”
BackgroundInfluentialThe depth of brand engagement funnel: dimensionalizing interaction in social media brand communities
Rossolatos, G. (2020) · Qualitative Market Research An International Journal · doi:10.1108/qmr-03-2019-0041 · Cited by 17
Simmich, J., Mandrusiak, A., Smith, S., Hartley, N., & Russell, T. G. (2020) · JMIR Serious Games · doi:10.2196/23069 · Cited by 17
“Finally, a cognitive processing and cognitive activation (CPCA) questionnaire was developed for use in this study, adapted from Hollebeek et al [41] and measured on a 7-point Likert scale as for the IMI.”
MethodCocreated brand value: theoretical model and propositions
Hollebeek, L. D., Clark, M. K., Hammedi, W., & Arvola, R. (2021) · Journal of Brand Management · doi:10.1057/s41262-021-00235-9 · Cited by 23
Self-citationEnhancing brand experience in the online social media network context: a contingency perspective
Marmat, G. (2021) · Qualitative Market Research An International Journal · doi:10.1108/qmr-07-2020-0096 · Cited by 22
Consumer engagement in value co-creation within virtual video game communities
Afi, F. E., & Ouiddad, S. (2021) · Management & Marketing · doi:10.2478/mmcks-2021-0022 · Cited by 21
“…aspect is defined by the level of concentration and information processing by the consumers in a particular interaction; The affective aspect reflects the consumer's sense of belonging; And the behavioral aspect refers to the action undertaken at a given encounter (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
Ethical-decision making of ‘Flights to Nowhere’ passengers in the COVID-19 and climate change era
Pratt, S., & Tolkach, D. (2022) · Current Issues in Tourism · doi:10.1080/13683500.2022.2038090 · Cited by 17
“Several researchers have used in-depth interviews for research with a small number of participants, across both tourism (He et al., 2021, 12 participants) and more general consumer research (Eynon et al., 2018, 9 participants; Hollebeek et al., 2014, 10 participants).”
BackgroundLove Is Blind! Exploring the Impact of Brand Love on eWOM in Chinese Hospitality Industry
Bilal, M., Akram, U., Zhang, Y., Cai, S., & Wang, Z. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.916206 · Cited by 17
“In the marketing literature, the online community’s desire for brand love research is broadly approved (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundHu, M., Chen, J., Alden, D. L., & Chen, Q. (2022) · Journal of International Marketing · doi:10.1177/1069031x221134495 · Cited by 17
Social media insights for non-luxury fashion SMEs in emerging markets: evidence from young consumers
Senanu, B., Anning‐Dorson, T., & Tackie, N. N. (2023) · Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management · doi:10.1108/jfmm-02-2022-0026 · Cited by 21
Aziz, M. A., & Ahmed, M. A. (2023) · Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Venturing · doi:10.56536/jebv.v3i1.38 · Cited by 23
“CBE comprises four items derived from pertinent literature (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
Engaging Business Customers Through Online Experiences in Different Cultures
Weiger, W. H. (2023) · Journal of International Marketing · doi:10.1177/1069031x231165234 · Cited by 23
Heidari, S., Zarei, M., Daneshfar, A., & Dokhanian, S. (2023) · Marketing and Management of Innovations · doi:10.21272/mmi.2023.1-19 · Cited by 17
“Customer brand attachment: To measure customer brand attachment, we used the Hollebeek et al. (2014) questionnaire.”
MethodOuyang, P., Liu, J., & Zhang, X. (2023) · Aslib Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1108/ajim-09-2022-0410 · Cited by 17
Engaging with (vs. avoiding) personalized advertising on social media
Loureiro, S. M. C., Hollebeek, L. D., Rather, R. A., Ruivo, L., Kaljund, K., & Guerreiro, J. (2023) · Journal of Marketing Communications · doi:10.1080/13527266.2023.2289044 · Cited by 20
“As their bond develops, the consumer’s attachment and loyalty to the brand should grow, stimulating their purchase decision-making (e.g., Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014).”
InfluentialSelf-citationJoy and excitement in the purchase process: the role of materialism and brand engagement
Razmus, W., Razmus, M., & Grabner‐Kräuter, S. (2024) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-04-2022-3937 · Cited by 15
Bozkurt, S., Gligor, D. M., Hollebeek, L. D., & Sumlin, C. (2024) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-09-2023-0317 · Cited by 17
Self-citationEnhancing user engagement and loyalty in online travel agents: a gamification approach
Choirisa, S. F., Waworuntu, A., & Istiono, W. (2024) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology · doi:10.1108/jhtt-08-2023-0214 · Cited by 18
AlFraihat, S. F., Ali, A. M., Hodaifa, G., & Alghizzawi, M. (2025) · Administrative Sciences · doi:10.3390/admsci15040124 · Cited by 17
“Behavioural engagement, according to Hollebeek et al. (2014), is the amount of time, effort, and focus customers give to their interactions with brands.”
Measuring Consumer Engagement in the Brain to Online Interactive Shopping Environments
Dulabh, M., Vazquez, D., Ryding, D., & Casson, A. J. (2017) · Progress in IS · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-64027-3_11 · Cited by 18
Customer-supplier relationships in high technology markets 3.0
de Ruyter, K., Keeling, D. I., & Cox, D. (2018) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.11.011 · Cited by 17
“(2011), yet the notion of behavioural manifestations of engagement is still in the beginning stage of development (Hollebeek et al. 2014). We agree with Bolton (2011) that behavioural engagement needs to be examined more elaborately, given its centrality to customer relationship management and its role as a fundament…”
BackgroundWhat Makes the Indian Youths to Engage with Online Retail Brands: An Empirical Study
Bhattacharya, S., & Anand, V. (2019) · Global Business Review · doi:10.1177/0972150918822106 · Cited by 19
Tamajón, L. A. G., & Morales-Pérez, S. (2020) · Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research · doi:10.1177/1096348019897990 · Cited by 18
“In relation to our second research question and building on previous literature (Brodie et al., 2011; Dessart et al., 2015; Hollebeek et al., 2014; So et al., 2014), the results show how important considering different brands (in our case festivals) and their main VBCs is in understanding the need…”
InfluentialConsumer suggestion sharing: helpful, pragmatic and conditional
Burnham, T. A., Ridinger, G., Carpenter, A., & Choi, L. (2020) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-10-2019-0806 · Cited by 16
Does gamified interaction build a strong consumer-brand connection? A study of mobile applications
Sangroya, D., Yadav, R., & Joshi, Y. (2021) · AJIS. Australasian journal of information systems/AJIS. Australian journal of information systems/Australian journal of information systems · doi:10.3127/ajis.v25i0.3105 · Cited by 18
“The multi-dimensional construct of CBE was measured by seven measurement statements proposed by Hollebeek et al. (2014) capturing emotional brand engagement and cognitive brand engagement.”
BackgroundMethodInfluence of aesthetics attributes of brand Web pages on customer brand engagement
Marmat, G. (2022) · Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication · doi:10.1108/gkmc-07-2021-0126 · Cited by 20
How Consumer Brand Engagement Effect on Purchase Intention? The Role of Social Media Elements
Bilal, M., Jianqu, Z., & Ming, J. (2020) · Journal of Business Strategy Finance and Management · doi:10.12944/jbsfm.02.01-02.06 · Cited by 17
Balamoorthy, S., & Chandra, B. (2023) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13270 · Cited by 24
Measuring online dialogic conversations’ quality: a scale development
Romenti, S., Valentini, C., Murtarelli, G., & Meggiorin, K. (2016) · Journal of Communication Management · doi:10.1108/jcom-11-2015-0090 · Cited by 17
Owing to interactivity: a meta-analysis on consumer-brand responses in the digital context
Fan, X., Li, H., & Jiang, X. (2025) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-09-2024-0457 · Cited by 21
Digital Brand Activism and Collective Action: Mapping Challenges and Strategies
Kumar, K. P., Spry, A., Figueiredo, B., Makkar, M., & Gurrieri, L. (2025) · Journal of Interactive Advertising · doi:10.1080/15252019.2025.2467051 · Cited by 19
“Brands engaging with consumers online at different levels (e.g., emotional, cognitive, behavioral) are more likely to engender favorable outcomes such as loyalty (Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014).”
Weiger, W. H., Giertz, J. N., Hammerschmidt, M., & Hollebeek, L. D. (2025) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115280 · Cited by 23
Self-citationKavoura, A., & Kozioł, L. (2016) · Advances in business strategy and competitive advantage book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-0843-4.ch007 · Cited by 16
Segmenting Brands' Social Network Site (Sns) Consumers: A Four-Country Study
Andrews, L., Bianchi, C., Wiese, M., Cúneo, A., & Hasan, S. F. E. (2018) · Journal of International Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1080/08961530.2018.1475273 · Cited by 17
“Thus, a better understanding of the characteristics of consumers engaging in brand SNSs is needed for understanding how and why consumers interact with brands in SNSs (Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014), and develop segmentation models.”
BackgroundInfluential‘No, I cannot just walk away’: government career entrenchment in China
Chen, C., & Xu, C. (2020) · International Review of Administrative Sciences · doi:10.1177/0020852319884624 · Cited by 14
“Following earlier studies of scale development (Hollebeek et al., 2014; Sung et al., 2019), we conducted semi-structured interviews to compile items for the GCE scale.”
Participant engagement in running events and why it matters who else takes part
Temerak, M. S., & Winklhofer, H. M. (2021) · European Sport Management Quarterly · doi:10.1080/16184742.2021.1956990 · Cited by 21
“Similarly, the branding literature clearly shows that customers who more closely engage with a brand – at a cognitive, emotional and behavioural level – also identify more with it (Harrigan et al., 2018; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Moliner et al., 2018).”
BackgroundInfluentialAbbasi, A. Z. (2022) · EuroMed Journal of Business · doi:10.1108/emjb-04-2022-0068 · Cited by 16
Actor engagement: origin, evolution and trends
Rodríguez, A. M. B., Oliva, E. J. D., & Salazar, J. A. V. (2022) · Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing · doi:10.1108/jbim-11-2021-0512 · Cited by 16
The perceptual antecedents of brand anthropomorphism in the name-brand voice assistant context
Vernuccio, M., Patrizi, M., Šerić, M., & Pastore, A. (2022) · Journal of Brand Management · doi:10.1057/s41262-022-00305-6 · Cited by 16
“Since brand trust, brand loyalty and consumer-brand engagement are constructs with relevant cognitive/evaluative components (Punniyamoorthy and Prasanna Mohan Raj 2007; Hollebeek et al. 2014), it is reasonable to hypothesise that NBVA social presence can also exert a positive effect on brand anthropomorphism that is b…”
BackgroundEvania, S., Listiana, E., Wendy, W., et al. (2023) · Asian Journal of Economics Business and Accounting · doi:10.9734/ajeba/2023/v23i2917 · Cited by 16
Izogo, E. E., & Mpinganjira, M. (2023) · Aslib Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1108/ajim-07-2022-0347 · Cited by 20
The COVID-19 pandemic and repurchase intention in building brand engagement in the airline industry
Shabankareh, M., Hamzavi, J., Ranjbaran, A., Esfahani, S. J., & Izadi, G. (2023) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights · doi:10.1108/jhti-08-2022-0327 · Cited by 23
Thomas, G. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su15107795 · Cited by 19
The nature of actor engagement intensity: a classification scheme
Wang, E., Fehrer, J. A., Li, L. P., Brodie, R. J., & Jurić, B. (2023) · Journal of service management · doi:10.1108/josm-11-2022-0348 · Cited by 17
Self-citationThe impact of company-generated posts with crisis-related content on online engagement behavior
Kleer, N., & Kunz, R. (2023) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114021 · Cited by 16
Chen, Y.-H., & Keng, C. (2023) · Service Business · doi:10.1007/s11628-023-00538-8 · Cited by 18
Social media marketing activities and luxury fashion brands in the post-pandemic world
Shah, A. M., & Ali, M. (2023) · Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics · doi:10.1108/apjml-10-2022-0863 · Cited by 16
Hu, S., Akram, U., Ji, F., Zhao, Y., & Song, J. (2023) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.104083 · Cited by 26
Liu, P. C. Y., Wang, W., Wang, Z., & Yang, Y. (2023) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.11.007 · Cited by 19
Zhang, Y., Liu, C., & Lang, C. (2024) · Journal of Marketing Analytics · doi:10.1057/s41270-023-00276-w · Cited by 18
“…has witnessed substantial proliferation, giving rise to diverse research directions, such as the development of a consumer engagement scale (Hollebeek et al. 2014), consumer engagement in virtual environments (Harrigan et al. 2017; Hollebeek and Macky 2019), and consumers’ engagement with…”
Wang, K., Chih, W., Honora, A., & Wu, Y. (2024) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2024.101359 · Cited by 22
Thapa, S., Panda, S., Ghimire, A., & Kim, D. J. (2024) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2024.114265 · Cited by 25
Creating Value through Social Media: Fresh Evidence from Cultural Organizations
Amitrano, C. C., Gargiulo, R., & Bifulco, F. (2018) · Journal of Creating Value · doi:10.1177/2394964318805616 · Cited by 19
“…to facilitate interaction among users; this interaction facilitates engagement (Barreda, Bilgihan, Nusair, & Okumus, 2015; Gummerus et al., 2012; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Nisar & Whitehead, 2016; Yang et al., 2016), which turns customers into fans (Barreda et al., 2015) and generates positive…”
BackgroundDecomposing social networking site regret: a uses and gratifications approach
Islam, A. K. M. N., Mäntymäki, M., & Kéfi, H. (2019) · Information Technology and People · doi:10.1108/itp-04-2018-0184 · Cited by 15
Engaging with TV events on Twitter
Segijn, C. M., Masłowska, E., Araujo, T., & Viswanathan, V. (2019) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/intr-08-2018-0389 · Cited by 17
Yang, J., & Zhao, X. (2020) · Journal of Promotion Management · doi:10.1080/10496491.2020.1851846 · Cited by 18
“…scholars have suggested that consumers’ behavioral engagement is a reflection of their cognitive and affective responses to brand-related content, which usually reflects consumers’ favorability toward (Hollebeek et al., 2014; Jahn & Kunz, 2012) and interest in a brand (Oh et al., 2017).”
BackgroundDeveloping and testing student engagement scale for higher educational students
Siddiqi, A. F., Shabbir, M. S., Abbas, M., Mahmood, A., & Salman, R. (2021) · Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education · doi:10.1108/jarhe-11-2020-0388 · Cited by 17
Developing Brand Loyalty through Consumer Engagement with Brand Communities in Social Media
Park, J., & Ha, S. (2021) · Asian Journal of Business Research · doi:10.14707/ajbr.210100 · Cited by 23
The Effect of Consumer Values on Engagement and Behavioral Intent: Moderating Role of Age
Kautish, P., Hollebeek, L. D., Khare, A., & Rather, R. A. (2022) · Palgrave studies in democracy, innovation, and entrepreneurship for growth · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-79709-6_14 · Cited by 17
Self-citationCompany social networks: customer communities or supplementary services?
Martins, C., & Patrício, L. (2018) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-07-2016-0250 · Cited by 16
“Some of these studies fall under the wider umbrella of social media engagement research (Brodie et al., 2013; Dessart et al., 2015; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Wirtz et al., 2013) and have sought to identify antecedents of engagement in CSNs.”
BackgroundHassan, M., & Sohail, M. S. (2021) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3922016 · Cited by 16
Turning the wheels of engagement: Evidence from entertainment live streaming
Song, X., Fu, M., Fang, J., Cai, Z., Tan, C., Lim, E. T. K., & Chong, A. Y. (2024) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-024-01020-1 · Cited by 19
Iliopoulou, E., Koronaki, E., Vlachvei, A., & Νόττα, Ο. (2024) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su16219202 · Cited by 17
Why do customers engage and interact in metaverse tourism? An SOR perspective
Rather, R. A., Zaman, M., Rasul, T., Nawaz, M. Z., & Akhtar, N. (2025) · Current Issues in Tourism · doi:10.1080/13683500.2024.2440808 · Cited by 17
“Hollebeek et al. (2014) define customer engagement as a quality of experience/s characterised by customers (users) affective, cognitive, behavioural and temporal investments once interacting within the virtual – surroundings/objects (e.g. metaverse applications/technology) (see also, Bilgi-han et…”
Özer, A., Özer, M., Buran, İ., & Genç, E. (2025) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-01-2023-4283 · Cited by 15
Digital daydreams: Exploring consumer motivations for engaging with the metaverse
Soni, S., Arora, P., Kasilingam, D. L., & Jain, V. (2025) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2025.104294 · Cited by 18
Fun or warm: How conversational style boosts customer engagement
Bhattacharjee, D. R., Kuanr, A., Pradhan, D., & Moharana, T. R. (2025) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2025.104293 · Cited by 18
AI sensation and engagement: Unpacking the sensory experience in human-AI interaction
Foroudi, P., Marvi, R., & Zha, D. (2025) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2025.102918 · Cited by 21
Waqas, M. (2021) · Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing · doi:10.1080/10495142.2021.1902905 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Waikato (NZ)
- Auckland University of Technology (NZ)
- University of Auckland (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Hollebeek, Linda D.
- Glynn, Mark S.
- Brodie, Roderick J.
- Venue
- Journal of Interactive Marketing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-05
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 149-165
- ISSN
- 1094-9968 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-6653
- OpenAlex
- W2061289966
- Cited by
- 3,276
- References
- 110
- Citations by year
- 2026: 392 · 2025: 370 · 2024: 349 · 2023: 398 · 2022: 363 · 2021: 334 · 2020: 316 · 2019: 259 · 2018: 196 · 2017: 159 · 2016: 92 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 7
- FWCI
- 323.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- Journal of Interactive Marketing (publishedVersion)
- Tuwhera (Auckland University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Massey University
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Digital Marketing and Social Media
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Marketing and Advertising Strategies
- Keywords
- brand engagement, social media, scale development, consumer-brand relationships, consumer involvement, self-brand connection, cognitive processes, affect, activation, nomological network
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
