The DOI matches its Crossref record; 104 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
2 of 29 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged · 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)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- 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
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA 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
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIn 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA 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
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA 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
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA 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
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- 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.
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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.
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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.
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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.
Study 1 is described as social-media-specific despite its unrestricted brand selection
MinorThe paper says it selected a social media setting for studies 1-3, but its Study 1 instructions allowed brands from any category; the reported selections include a television show.
“We selected a social media setting in studies 1-3”
“We instructed the participants to select a brand in any category that is 'highly engaging' to them”
Activation-self-brand squared correlation does not match its correlation
MinorTable 5 reports a correlation of .86 for this pair, whose square is approximately .74, but places .46 in the corresponding squared-correlation cell.
Reported 0.46 · recomputed 0.7396
“| Activation | .72 | .67 | .75 | .69 | .46 | .49 | | Self-Brand | .84 | .74 | .86 | .86 | .75 | .45 |”
Affection-brand-usage squared correlation does not match its correlation
MinorTable 5 gives a correlation of .74 for this pair, implying a squared correlation of approximately .55 rather than the reported .46.
Reported 0.46 · recomputed 0.5476
“| 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 |”
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
Flagged first, then by citations
6 of the 110 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
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 101–200 of 3,233
Chen, R., Zhou, Z., Zhan, G., & Zhou, N. (2019) · Journal of Destination Marketing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2019.100402 · Cited by 259
Islam, J., Shahid, S., Rasool, A., Rahman, Z., Khan, I., & Rather, R. (2020) · International Journal of Bank Marketing · doi:10.1108/ijbm-12-2019-0460 · Cited by 201
Promoting sales of online games through customer engagement
Cheung, C. M. K., Shen, X., Lee, Z. W. Y., & Chan, T. K. H. (2015) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2015.03.001 · Cited by 241
“Of the few studies including empirical work, the research focuses primarily on customer engagement with brands (Hollebeek et al., 2014; Laroche et al., 2012) and brand communities (Brodie et al., 2013; Gummerus et al., 2012).”
BackgroundInfluentialCustomer engagement in a Big Data world
Kunz, W. H., Aksoy, L., Bart, Y., Heinonen, K., Kabadayi, S., Ordenes, F. J. V., Σιγάλα, Μ., Díaz, D., & Theodoulidis, B. (2017) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-10-2016-0352 · Cited by 247
Engagement valence duality and spillover effects in online brand communities
Bowden, J., Conduit, J., Hollebeek, L. D., Luoma‐aho, V., & Solem, B. A. A. (2017) · Journal of Service Theory and Practice · doi:10.1108/jstp-04-2016-0072 · Cited by 259
Self-citationMachado, J. C., de Carvalho, L. V., Azar, S., André, A. R., & Santos, B. (2018) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.07.016 · Cited by 265
“a brand) (Brodie et al., 2011; Hollebeek, 2011; Hollebeek et al., 2014) and others focusing on the behavioral aspects of this relationship (e.”
BackgroundMessage content features and social media engagement: evidence from the media industry
Moran, G., Muzellec, L., & Johnson, D. S. (2019) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-09-2018-2014 · Cited by 224
Bag, S., Srivastava, G., Bashir, M. A., Kumari, S., Giannakis, M., & Chowdhury, A. H. (2021) · Benchmarking An International Journal · doi:10.1108/bij-07-2021-0415 · Cited by 286
An integrated model of social media brand engagement
Gómez, M., Lopez, C., & Molina, A. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.026 · Cited by 204
Mobile application driven consumer engagement
Tarutė, A., Nikou, S., & Gatautis, R. (2017) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.01.006 · Cited by 229
Bazi, S., Filieri, R., & Gorton, M. (2023) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113778 · Cited by 271
Internal and External Determinants of Consumer Engagement in Sustainable Consumption
Piligrimienė, Ž., Žukauskaitė, A., Korzilius, H. P. L. M., Banytė, J., & Dovalienė, A. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12041349 · Cited by 266
“One of the areas that has gained much attention in academic literature is the application of the engagement construct [6,18,48].”
BackgroundGavilanes, J. M., Flatten, T. C., & Brettel, M. (2018) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.2017.1405751 · Cited by 259
“Our conceptual development explains how DCE dimensions include cognitive, affective, and behavioral consumer responses (Avnet and Hig-gins 2006; Brodie et al. 2011; Brodie et al. 2013; Hollebeek 2011; Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialCustomer engagement in evolving technological environments: synopsis and guiding propositions
Hollebeek, L. D., Sprott, D. E., Andreassen, T. W., Costley, C. L., Klaus, P., Kuppelwieser, V. G., Karahasanović, A., Taguchi, T., Islam, J. U., & Rather, R. A. (2019) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-09-2019-970 · Cited by 234
Self-citationOne size doesn’t fit all: a uses and gratifications analysis of social media platforms
Pelletier, M. J., Krallman, A., Adams, F. G., & Hancock, T. D. (2020) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-10-2019-0159 · Cited by 224
How to engage customers in co-creation: customers’ motivations for collaborative innovation
Fernandes, T., & Remelhe, P. (2015) · Journal of Strategic Marketing · doi:10.1080/0965254x.2015.1095220 · Cited by 240
Evidence that user-generated content that produces engagement increases purchase behaviours
Malthouse, E. C., Calder, B. J., Kim, S. J., & Vandenbosch, M. (2016) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2016.1148066 · Cited by 247
“Further, as supported by the research of Muntinga et al. (2011), Calder and Malthouse (2008, 2016, 2009), Higgins and Scholer (2009), Vivek, Beatty, & Morgan (2012), and Hollebeek et al. (2014), high engagement is fostered by experiences that connect a brand to personal goals or values.”
BackgroundKelders, S. M., van Zyl, L. E., & Ludden, G. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00926 · Cited by 207
“(Hollebeek et al., 2014); consumer brand Evaluate concept + develop and validate scale Qual.”
BackgroundMarbach, J., Lages, C. R., & Nunan, D. (2016) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2015.1128472 · Cited by 223
Mobile money as a driver of digital financial inclusion
Shaikh, A. A., Glavee-Geo, R., Karjaluoto, H., & Hinson, R. E. (2022) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122158 · Cited by 258
Abou‐Shouk, M., & Soliman, M. S. A. (2021) · Journal of Destination Marketing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2021.100559 · Cited by 259
Conceptualising and measuring social media engagement: A systematic literature review
Trunfio, M., & Rossi, S. (2021) · Italian Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1007/s43039-021-00035-8 · Cited by 270
Antecedents of brand love in online network-based communities. A social identity perspective
Vernuccio, M., Pagani, M., Barbarossa, C., & Pastore, A. (2015) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-12-2014-0772 · Cited by 229
Carvalho, M. A. M., & Fernandes, T. (2018) · The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice · doi:10.1080/10696679.2017.1389241 · Cited by 208
“Each of these dimensions corresponds to the behavioral, emotional, and cognitive aspects of CBE already identify by Hollebeek, Glynn and Brodie (2014).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialArya, V., Sambyal, R., Sharma, A., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2023) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.2214 · Cited by 234
Chu, S., Lien, C.-H., & Cao, Y. (2018) · International Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/02650487.2018.1470917 · Cited by 220
“…and has gained considerable attention in advertising and marketing literature (Brodie and Hollebeek 2011; Brodie et al. 2011, 2013; Hollebeek 2011; Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014; Malthouse and Calder 2011; Marbach, Lages, and Nunan 2016; Mollen and Wilson 2010; Vivek, Beatty, and Morgan 2012).”
BackgroundA Consumer-based Taxonomy of Digital Customer Engagement Practices
Eigenraam, A. W., Eelen, J., van Lin, A., & Verlegh, P. W. J. (2018) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2018.07.002 · Cited by 230
Digital ecosystem and consumer engagement: A socio-technical perspective
Morgan‐Thomas, A., Dessart, L., & Veloutsou, C. A. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.042 · Cited by 238
Personality factors as predictors of online consumer engagement: an empirical investigation
Islam, J. U., Rahman, Z., & Hollebeek, L. D. (2017) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-10-2016-0193 · Cited by 203
Self-citationHuerta-Álvarez, R., Cambra‐Fierro, J., & Blasco, M. F. (2020) · Journal of Destination Marketing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100413 · Cited by 253
Argyris, Y. A., Wang, Z., Kim, Y., & Yin, Z. (2020) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106443 · Cited by 260
Hollebeek, L. D. (2017) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.11.016 · Cited by 218
Self-citationRather, R. A., Tehseen, S., & Parrey, S. H. (2018) · Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC · doi:10.1108/sjme-06-2018-0030 · Cited by 195
Fifteen years of customer engagement research: a bibliometric and network analysis
Hollebeek, L. D., Sharma, T. G., Pandey, R., Sanyal, P., & Clark, M. K. (2021) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-01-2021-3301 · Cited by 223
Self-citationThe customer engagement ecosystem
Masłowska, E., Malthouse, E. C., & Collinger, T. (2016) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2015.1134628 · Cited by 220
“Previous attempts to develop engagement measurement (e.g., Calder et al. 2016, 2009; Hollebeek et al. 2014) only measured parts of engagement, for example, experiences.”
BackgroundDedeoğlu, B. B., Taheri, B., Okumuş, F., & Gannon, M. J. (2019) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2019.103954 · Cited by 201
Brand engagement and experience in online services
Khan, I. M., Hollebeek, L. D., Fatma, M., Islam, J. U., & Rahman, Z. (2019) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-03-2019-0106 · Cited by 255
Self-citationSchee, B. A. V., Peltier, J. W., & Dahl, A. J. (2020) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-01-2020-0010 · Cited by 201
Hepola, J., Karjaluoto, H., & Hintikka, A. (2017) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-10-2016-1348 · Cited by 221
“We also demonstrate that considering the definition and operationalization of CBE provided by Hollebeek et al. (2014) researchers should apply formative measurement instead of the commonly used reflective measurement if they wish to construct a higher-order model.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialOnline second-hand shopping motivation – Conceptualization, scale development, and validation
Padmavathy, C., Swapana, M., & Paul, J. (2019) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.05.014 · Cited by 208
The role of customer brand engagement and brand experience in online banking
Khan, I. M., Rahman, Z., & Fatma, M. (2016) · International Journal of Bank Marketing · doi:10.1108/ijbm-07-2015-0110 · Cited by 214
The transpiring journey of customer engagement research in marketing
Islam, J. U., & Rahman, Z. (2016) · Management Decision · doi:10.1108/md-01-2016-0028 · Cited by 238
Interactive brand experience pathways to customer-brand engagement and value co-creation
Merrilees, B. (2016) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-04-2016-1151 · Cited by 186
Islam, J. U., & Rahman, Z. (2016) · Journal of Global Fashion Marketing · doi:10.1080/20932685.2015.1110041 · Cited by 197
“This study is a response to such calls for more empirical investigation of customer engagement with different brands and industry contexts (Dessart et al., 2015; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Vivek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialHow stories generate consumer engagement: An exploratory study
Dessart, L., & Pitardi, V. (2019) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.06.045 · Cited by 234
“Although various dimensions have been proposed, the majority of studies relates to Brodie and Hollebeek’s work (Brodie et al., 2011, 2013; Hollebeek, 2011; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Hollebeek & Chen, 2014), which conceptualizes CE as including three dimensions: cognitive, emotional, and behavioral.”
BackgroundFsQCA versus regression: The context of customer engagement
Gligor, D. M., & Bozkurt, S. (2019) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101929 · Cited by 198
An experiential model of consumer engagement in social media
Tafesse, W. (2016) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-05-2015-0879 · Cited by 200
Nadeem, W., Tan, T. M., Tajvidi, M., & Hajli, N. (2021) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120952 · Cited by 217
Consequences of Consumer Engagement in Service Marketing: An Empirical Exploration
Rather, R. A. (2018) · Journal of Global Marketing · doi:10.1080/08911762.2018.1454995 · Cited by 224
“Empirical studies on CE have been investigated in social media (Dessart et al., 2016; Hollebeek et al., 2014); in physical goods (Vivek et al.”
BackgroundInfluentialService innovativeness and tourism customer outcomes
Hollebeek, L. D., & Rather, R. A. (2019) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-03-2018-0256 · Cited by 209
Self-citationYang, S., Lin, S., Carlson, J. R., & Ross, W. T. (2016) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2016.1143863 · Cited by 185
“In addition, while brand engagement on social media does not capture the thoughts and feelings a brand may evoke in individuals (Hollebeek et al., 2014), it does capture brand-related behavioural interactivity from an individual perspective and brand perspective.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialLuo, X., Cheah, J., Hollebeek, L. D., & Lim, X. (2023) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103644 · Cited by 233
Self-citationThe determinants of stakeholder engagement in digital platforms
Viglia, G., Pera, R., & Alcañiz, J. E. B. (2017) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.029 · Cited by 207
Cheung, M. L., Pires, G. D., Rosenberger, P. J., Leung, W. K. S., & Sharipudin, M.-N. S. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102574 · Cited by 200
“…as a psychological state that involves consumers ’ passion for a brand based on the strength of the consumer-brand relationship (Brodie et al., 2013; Hollebeek et al., 2014, 2016), CBE has received extensive scholarly attention in recent years (Cheung et al., 2020b; Hollebeek et al., 2016).”
InfluentialConsumer engagement with eWOM on social media: the role of social capital
Gvili, Y., & Levy, S. (2018) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/oir-05-2017-0158 · Cited by 211
“Accordingly, marketing research literature has attached different meanings to this concept, along with diverse and disputable definitions (Hollebeek et al., 2014; Brodie et al., 2011; Calder et al., 2009).”
BackgroundInfluentialThe moderating role of customer engagement experiences in customer satisfaction–loyalty relationship
Thakur, R. (2019) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-11-2017-0895 · Cited by 196
Gamified interactions: whether, when, and how games facilitate self–brand connections
Berger, A., Schlager, T., Sprott, D. E., & Herrmann, A. P. (2017) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-017-0530-0 · Cited by 170
Brand strategies in social media in hospitality and tourism
Moro, S., & Rita, P. (2017) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-07-2016-0340 · Cited by 172
“Consumer brand engagement is conceptualized as “a consumer’s positively valenced brandrelated cognitive, emotional and behavioral activity during or related to focal consumer/brand interactions” (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundNazir, S., Khadim, S., Asadullah, M. A., & Syed, N. (2022) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102190 · Cited by 217
Exploring how social media platforms influence fashion consumer decisions in the UK retail sector
Nash, J. (2018) · Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management · doi:10.1108/jfmm-01-2018-0012 · Cited by 217
Calder, B. J., Isaac, M. S., & Malthouse, E. C. (2016) · Journal of Advertising Research · doi:10.2501/jar-2015-028 · Cited by 169
“As previously mentioned, fixed-scale approaches to measuring engagement have been the rule rather than the exception in both the practitioner and academic literature (e.g., Brakus et al., 2009; Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie, 2014; Mollen and Wilson, 2010; Sprott, Czellar, and Spangenberg, 2009).”
BackgroundMethodMosteller, J., & Poddar, A. (2017) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2017.02.003 · Cited by 168
Rahman, M. S., Bag, S., Hossain, M. A., Abdel Fattah, F. A. M., Gani, M. O., & Rana, N. P. (2023) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103273 · Cited by 170
Virtual reality through the customer journey: Framework and propositions
Hollebeek, L. D., Clark, M. K., Andreassen, T. W., Sigurðsson, V., & Smith, D. L. (2020) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102056 · Cited by 186
“At the intra-VR experience stage, it is important to stimulate two-way consumer/brand or -firm interactions (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationHollebeek, L. D., Menidjel, C., Sarstedt, M., Jansson, J., & Urbonavičius, S. (2024) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21957 · Cited by 207
Self-citationAI-driven personalization: Unraveling consumer perceptions in social media engagement
Teepapal, T. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2024.108549 · Cited by 179
Brand engagement in self‐concept and consumer engagement in social media: The role of the source
Giakoumaki, C., & Krepapa, A. (2019) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21312 · Cited by 168
Bilro, R. G., Loureiro, S. M. C., & Guerreiro, J. (2018) · Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management · doi:10.1080/19368623.2018.1506375 · Cited by 185
“Although past research has regarded cognitive processing as one of the important dimensions of engagement (e.g., Brodie et al., 2013; Hollebeek et al., 2014), as far as we know, the current study is the first to show empirically that cognitive processing is more relevant than affection and…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialHow trust moderates social media engagement and brand equity
Chahal, H., & Rani, A. (2017) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-10-2016-0104 · Cited by 178
Al‐Adwan, A. S., Yaseen, H., Alkhwaldi, A. F., Jafar, R. M. S., Fauzi, M. A., & Abdullah, A. (2025) · Journal of Global Marketing · doi:10.1080/08911762.2025.2463897 · Cited by 189
“In virtual environments, consumers’ brand engagement is referred to as “a consumer’s positively valenced cognitive, social, and behavioral brand-related activity during, or related to specific consumer/brand interactions” (Hollebeek et al., 2014, p. 154).”
Kwon, J.-H., Jung, S.-H., Choi, H.-J., & Kim, J. (2020) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-02-2020-2763 · Cited by 231
de Regt, A., Plangger, K. A., & Barnes, S. J. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.08.004 · Cited by 165
“CBE is popularly broken down into affective, behavioral, and cognitive dimensions (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundStrategic customer engagement marketing: A decision making framework
Alvarez-Milán, A., Felix, R., Rauschnabel, P. A., & Hinsch, C. A. (2018) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.07.017 · Cited by 189
Driving consumer–brand engagement and co-creation by brand interactivity
Cheung, M. L., Pires, G. D., Rosenberger, P. J., & de Oliveira, M. J. (2020) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-12-2018-0587 · Cited by 205
Benefitting from virtual customer environments: An empirical study of customer engagement
Verhagen, T., Swen, E., Feldberg, F., & Merikivi, J. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.061 · Cited by 173
“In particular we refer to social network sites, were companies and customers increasingly get in touch with each other and were companies search for multiple ways to get their customers engaged (also see Hollebeek et al., 2014; Reza Habibi, Laroche, & Richard, 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialEnhancing customer relationships with retail service brands
So, K. K. F., King, C., Sparks, B., & Wang, Y. (2016) · Journal of service management · doi:10.1108/josm-05-2015-0176 · Cited by 189
de Vries, L., Peluso, A. M., Romani, S., Leeflang, P. S. H., & Marcati, A. (2017) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.016 · Cited by 180
Examining the determinants and outcomes of mobile app engagement - A longitudinal perspective
McLean, G. (2018) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.03.015 · Cited by 183
Brand love: the emotional bridge between experience and engagement, generation-M perspective
Junaid, M. R., Hou, F., Hussain, K., & Kirmani, A. A. (2019) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-04-2018-1852 · Cited by 184
Zhang, M., Hu, M., Guo, L., & Liu, W. (2017) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/intr-06-2016-0148 · Cited by 176
“…0 7: 14 0 5 Ju ly 2 01 7 (P T ) scholars indicate that customer engagement is derived from frequent and pleasure interactive experience between customers and engagement objects, e.g. brands, communities (Mollen and Wilson, 2010; Van Doorn et al., 2010; Brodie et al., 2013; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundPang, H. (2021) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2020.101561 · Cited by 170
Samarah, T. A., Bayram, P., Aljuhmani, H. Y., & Elrehail, H. (2021) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-03-2021-0072 · Cited by 230
Of “Likes” and “Pins”: The Effects of Consumers’ Attachment to Social Media
VanMeter, R. A., Grisaffe, D. B., & Chonko, L. B. (2015) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2015.09.001 · Cited by 155
“Other research, such as Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie (2014), has related to the brand in the context of social media.”
BackgroundInfluentialDrivers of brand community engagement
Kumar, J., & Kumar, V. (2019) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101949 · Cited by 187
Cheung, M. L., Pires, G. D., Rosenberger, P. J., Leung, W. K. S., & Ting, H. (2020) · Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ) · doi:10.1016/j.ausmj.2020.03.006 · Cited by 218
“…on the sharing of consumer-initiated content for brand-value creation (such as discussing consumers’ personal needs, their suggestions for improvements and ideas for product development), building consumer-brand relationships and, therefore, CBE (Hsieh and Chang, 2016; Nysveen and Pedersen, 2014).”
BackgroundRather, R. A., Hollebeek, L. D., Vo‐Thanh, T., Ramkissoon, H. R., Leppiman, A., & Smith, D. L. (2022) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.2070 · Cited by 191
Self-citationInfluences of customer participation and customer brand engagement on brand loyalty
Solem, B. A. A. (2016) · Journal of Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1108/jcm-04-2015-1390 · Cited by 167
‘Go with the flow’ for gamification and sustainability marketing
Whittaker, L., Mulcahy, R. F., & Russell‐Bennett, R. (2021) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102305 · Cited by 152
Tuškej, U., & Podnar, K. (2017) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-05-2016-1199 · Cited by 177
“The study by Hollebeek et al. (2014) investigating the influence of CBE on CBI showed that out of the three dimensions of CBE, only the affective engagement strongly influences CBI, while cognitive and even more so active (behavioural) engagement have only a weak influence on CBI.”
BackgroundInfluentialCreating brand engagement through in-store gamified customer experiences
Högberg, J., Ramberg, M. O., Gustafsson, A., & Wästlund, E. (2019) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.05.006 · Cited by 139
Social media influencers and consumer engagement: A review and future research agenda
Pradhan, B., Kishore, K., & Gokhale, N. P. (2023) · International Journal of Consumer Studies · doi:10.1111/ijcs.12901 · Cited by 184
Bowden, J., & Mirzaei, A. (2021) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-01-2018-0007 · Cited by 196
Hollebeek, L. D., & Belk, R. W. (2021) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2021.03.001 · Cited by 171
Self-citationMartín‐Consuegra, D., Díaz, E., Gómez, M., & Molina, A. (2018) · Physiology & Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2018.03.028 · Cited by 166
“Existing research contends that the types of activity that matter most to companies are those in which consumers interact with brands by creating original content or by contributing to content created by others [6,7].”
BackgroundCustomer engagement in the digital age: a review and research agenda.
Rasool, A., Shah, F., & Islam, J. (2020) · Current Opinion in Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.05.003 · Cited by 136
Antecedents and outcomes of online brand engagement
Loureiro, S. M. C., Gorgus, T., & Kaufmann, H. R. (2017) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/oir-08-2016-0236 · Cited by 155
“, 2010), involvement (Hollebeek et al., 2014; De Vries and Carlson, 2014) or social identification with a brand community (Baldus et al.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialBrand engagement and search for brands on social media: Comparing Generations X and Y in Portugal
Bento, M., Martinez, L. M., & Martinez, L. F. (2018) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.04.003 · Cited by 147
Individual-level cultural consumer engagement styles
Hollebeek, L. D. (2018) · International Marketing Review · doi:10.1108/imr-07-2016-0140 · Cited by 165
Self-citationUsing Message Strategy to Drive Consumer Behavioral Engagement on Social Media
Tafesse, W., & Wien, A. H. (2017) · Journal of Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1108/jcm-08-2016-1905 · Cited by 150
“Consumer engagement is a multidimensional concept manifested in various forms of emotional, cognitive and behavioral responses with a brand or firm focus (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
Revisiting the consumer brand engagement concept
Obilo, O. O., Chefor, E., & Saleh, A. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.12.023 · Cited by 197
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
