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 201–300 of 3,233
Hollebeek, L. D., Kumar, V., & Srivastava, R. K. (2020) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670520977680 · Cited by 162
“Given engagement’s proneness to fluctuate (Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014), as outlined, we highlight the importance of isolating SE at individual points in time throughout its process.”
BackgroundSelf-citationThe Dynamics of Consumer Engagement with Mobile Technologies
Viswanathan, V., Hollebeek, L. D., Malthouse, E. C., Masłowska, E., Kim, S. J., & Xie, W. (2017) · Service Science · doi:10.1287/serv.2016.0161 · Cited by 148
Self-citationThe role of perceived firm social media interactivity in facilitating customer engagement behaviors
Bozkurt, S., Gligor, D. M., & Babin, B. J. (2020) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-07-2019-0613 · Cited by 159
Mega or macro social media influencers: Who endorses brands better?
Tiago, M. T. B., Santiago, J., & Tiago, F. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113606 · Cited by 196
Certainty in Language Increases Consumer Engagement on Social Media
Pezzuti, T., Leonhardt, J. M., & Warren, C. (2021) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2020.06.005 · Cited by 143
“For instance, engaging consumers on social media is known to positively affect brand attitude (Cruz et al., 2017; Hollebeek et al., 2014), and future research could assess whether engagement resulting from the expression of certainty in messaging affects downstream marketing outcomes such as sales and satisfaction.”
BackgroundChen, T., Drennan, J. C., Andrews, L., & Hollebeek, L. D. (2018) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-05-2016-0298 · Cited by 156
Self-citationConsumer Engagement with Brand Posts on Social Media in Consecutive Stages of the Customer Journey
Demmers, J., Weltevreden, J. W. J., & van Dolen, W. M. (2020) · International Journal of Electronic Commerce · doi:10.1080/10864415.2019.1683701 · Cited by 170
“Important to note, this behavioral focus does not contradict conceptualizations of consumer engagement as a motivational construct including cognitive and affective dimensions [11, 34].”
BackgroundPromoting brand engagement behaviors and loyalty through perceived service value and innovativeness
Leckie, C., Nyadzayo, M. W., & Johnson, L. W. (2017) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-01-2017-0035 · Cited by 160
The Customer Engagement EcosystemPreprint
Masłowska, E., Malthouse, E. C., & Collinger, T. (2015) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2694040 · Cited by 143
Customer brand co-creation: a conceptual model
France, C., Merrilees, B., & Miller, D. (2015) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-06-2014-0105 · Cited by 153
Blasco‐Arcas, L., Ortega, B. H., & Martínez, J. J. (2016) · Journal of Service Theory and Practice · doi:10.1108/jstp-12-2014-0286 · Cited by 152
Mathwick, C., & Mosteller, J. R. (2016) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670516682088 · Cited by 147
Yuan, D., Lin, Z., Filieri, R., Liu, R., & Zheng, M. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.04.044 · Cited by 143
Dhaoui, C., & Webster, C. M. (2020) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2020.06.005 · Cited by 138
The smarter, the better?! Customer well-being, engagement, and perceptions in smart service systems
Henkens, B., Verleye, K., & Larivière, B. (2020) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2020.09.006 · Cited by 164
“Hence, customer engagement is a multidimensional concept (Harrigan, Evers, Miles, & Daly, 2018; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
InfluentialSocial presence and customer brand engagement on Facebook brand pages
Pongpaew, W., Speece, M. W., & Tiangsoongnern, L. (2017) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-08-2015-0956 · Cited by 157
Customer brand engagement behavior in online brand communities
Gong, T. (2017) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-08-2016-0293 · Cited by 150
Expanding customer engagement: the role of negative engagement, dual valences and contexts
Naumann, K., Bowden, J., & Gabbott, M. (2020) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-07-2017-0464 · Cited by 146
“Namely, Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn operate as voluntary “opt-in” services that allow customers to forge social and professional connections, create and share content, self-brand and discuss shared interests with others (Miller, 2017; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialExamining consumers’ usage intention of contactless payment systems
Karjaluoto, H., Shaikh, A. A., Leppäniemi, M., & Luomala, R. (2019) · International Journal of Bank Marketing · doi:10.1108/ijbm-04-2019-0155 · Cited by 136
Brands as relationship builders in the virtual world: A bibliometric analysis
Veloutsou, C. A., & Mafé, C. R. (2019) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2019.100901 · Cited by 149
“As to the composition of the three clusters of authors based on sharing the same references (Table 4), the Cluster 1 had the largest number of authors, with a total of 30, and a concentration of the most cited, such as two co-authors in the Brodie and Hollebeek team and three co-authors in the Veloutsou, Dessart and M…”
InfluentialLytras, M. D., Visvizi, A., Chopdar, P. K., Sarirete, A., & Alhalabi, W. (2020) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102146 · Cited by 138
Wallace, E., Torres, P., Augusto, M., & Stefuryn, M. (2021) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-06-2020-2937 · Cited by 180
Ghali, Z., Rather, R. A., & Khan, I. M. (2023) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103671 · Cited by 145
Antecedents and consequences of customer engagement on Facebook
Hinson, R. E., Boateng, H., Renner, A., & Kosiba, J. P. (2019) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-04-2018-0059 · Cited by 160
Kujur, F., & Singh, S. (2019) · Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · doi:10.4067/s0718-18762020000100104 · Cited by 173
“[59] define brand satisfaction as an outcome of consumer engagement as it facilitates consumers and brands interactions on this media.”
BackgroundInfluentialAmbidextrous innovation orientation effected by the digital transformation
Scuotto, V., Arrigo, E., Candelo, E., & Nicotra, M. (2019) · Business Process Management Journal · doi:10.1108/bpmj-03-2019-0135 · Cited by 133
Engaging customers through brand authenticity perceptions: The moderating role of self-congruence
Kumar, V., & Kaushik, A. K. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.08.065 · Cited by 155
Do brands’ social media marketing activities matter? A moderation analysis
Khan, I. M. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102794 · Cited by 156
Swani, K., & Labrecque, L. I. (2020) · Marketing Letters · doi:10.1007/s11002-020-09518-8 · Cited by 146
I can’t stop hating you: an anti-brand-community perspective on apple brand hate
Rodrigues, C., Brandão, A., & Rodrigues, P. C. L. (2020) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-10-2019-2621 · Cited by 133
Majumder, M. G., Gupta, S. D., & Paul, J. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.06.012 · Cited by 156
Saura, J. R., Palacios‐Marqués, D., & Fernández, A. I. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.03.001 · Cited by 139
Customer Engagement: A Systematic Review and Future Research Priorities
Ng, S. C., Sweeney, J., & Plewa, C. (2020) · Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ) · doi:10.1016/j.ausmj.2020.05.004 · Cited by 193
“Some researchers have used a broader conceptualisation and easure multiple dimensions, including emotional and cognitive spects as well as behaviours (e.g. Hollebeek et al. 2014 ); while thers establish measures that deepen or extend the recognised hree dimensions of engagement.”
BackgroundBrand marketing, big data and social innovation as future research directions for engagement
Calder, B. J., Malthouse, E. C., & Masłowska, E. (2016) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2016.1144326 · Cited by 133
Gamification as a platform for brand co-creation experiences
Nobre, H. M., & Ferreira, A. (2017) · Journal of Brand Management · doi:10.1057/s41262-017-0055-3 · Cited by 153
“…through sales growth, cost reduction, brand advocacy, superior brand co-creation experiences, and collaborative activities of product development (Hollebeek et al. 2014), presenting predictive and explanatory power in understanding consumer behavior (Brakus et al. 2009), such as satisfaction,…”
BackgroundInfluentialDynamics and drivers of customer engagement: within the dyad and beyond
Fehrer, J. A., Woratschek, H., Germelmann, C. C., & Brodie, R. J. (2018) · Journal of service management · doi:10.1108/josm-08-2016-0236 · Cited by 156
Self-citationFang, Y. (2016) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.20972 · Cited by 128
van Asperen, M., de Rooij, P., & Dijkmans, C. (2018) · International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration · doi:10.1080/15256480.2017.1305313 · Cited by 120
“Customer engagement is a relatively new concept, receiving a lot of attention in literature (Brodie et al., 2011; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Verhoef et al., 2010).”
BackgroundPerez‐Vega, R., Taheri, B., Farrington, T., & O’Gorman, K. D. (2017) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2017.11.013 · Cited by 134
How does brand-related user-generated content differ across social media? Evidence reloaded
Roma, P., & Aloini, D. (2018) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.055 · Cited by 154
Kim, B., Yoo, M., & Yang, W. (2019) · Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research · doi:10.1177/1096348019887202 · Cited by 126
“The recent research demonstrates the positive influence of customer engagement on businesses, such as enhanced customer relationships and brand attitude and higher future purchasing intentions (e.g., Brodie et al., 2013; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Tussyadiah, Kausar, & Soesilo, 2015).”
BackgroundMajeed, M., Asare, C., Fatawu, A., & Abubakari, A. (2022) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2022.2028331 · Cited by 182
“CBE has a positive impact on brand loyalty outcomes, such as repurchase intent (Cheung et al., 2020; Dwivedi, 2015; Hollebeek et al., 2014; L.D. Hollebeek & Macky, 2019; Leckie et al., 2016).”
BackgroundTourist loyalty in the metaverse: the role of immersive tourism experience and cognitive perceptions
Jafar, R. M. S., & Ahmad, W. (2023) · Tourism Review · doi:10.1108/tr-11-2022-0552 · Cited by 135
Groeger, L., Moroko, L., & Hollebeek, L. D. (2016) · Journal of Strategic Marketing · doi:10.1080/0965254x.2015.1095223 · Cited by 127
“Keywords: customer engagement behaviours (CEBs); non-paying CEB; mixed method approach; model development; WOM; product seeding”
InfluentialSelf-citationSecond Person Pronouns Enhance Consumer Involvement and Brand Attitude
Cruz, R. E., Leonhardt, J. M., & Pezzuti, T. (2017) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2017.05.001 · Cited by 125
“Assessing consumer involvement in this way is supported by prior research that suggests that consumer involvement is closely associated with interacting with brands in social media (Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014).”
ResultOnline brand advocacy (OBA): the development of a multiple item scale
Wilk, V., Soutar, G. N., & Harrigan, P. (2019) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-10-2018-2090 · Cited by 125
Drivers of user engagement in eWoM communication
Rossmann, A., Ranjan, K. R., & Sugathan, P. (2016) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-01-2015-0013 · Cited by 140
Heller, J., Chylinski, M., de Ruyter, K., Keeling, D. I., Hilken, T., & Mahr, D. (2020) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670520933692 · Cited by 131
“In line with Hollebeek et al. (2014) and Hollebeek and Macky (2019), we describe emotional engagement in AR service automation as the customer’s positively valenced affect toward an AR automated service.”
BackgroundService relationships and the customer disengagement – engagement conundrum
Bowden, J., Gabbott, M., & Naumann, K. (2014) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2014.983143 · Cited by 141
Strategic B2B customer experience management: the importance of outcomes-based measures
Zolkiewski, J. M., Story, V., Burton, J., Chan, P., Gomes, A., Hunter‐Jones, P., O’Malley, L., Peters, L. D., Raddats, C., & Robinson, W. (2017) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-10-2016-0350 · Cited by 178
“Indeed, recent studies have also attempted to measure customer engagement (e.g., Brodie et al., 2013; Calder et al., 2016; Hollebeek et al., 2014), and to examine how firms can benefit from it (Pansari and Kumar, 2016).”
BackgroundSocial media marketing in luxury brands
Arrigo, E. (2018) · Management Research Review · doi:10.1108/mrr-04-2017-0134 · Cited by 126
“260) but also by actively interacting and collaborating with customers in the co-creation process of new products (Gummerus et al., 2012; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundExamining customer engagement and brand intimacy in social media context
Wang, T., & Lee, F.-Y. (2020) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102035 · Cited by 123
Hepola, J., Leppäniemi, M., & Karjaluoto, H. (2020) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102232 · Cited by 138
“The cognitive dimension concerns pleasurable absorption (Dwivedi, 2015; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Hsieh and Chang, 2016), while the emotional dimension is related to a strong positive affect and the feelings that are evoked by the interaction (Hollebeek, 2011; Hollebeek et al.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialVanMeter, R. A., Syrdal, H. A., Mantel, S. P., Grisaffe, D. B., & Nesson, E. T. (2018) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2018.03.003 · Cited by 132
The effect of consumer-generated media stimuli on emotions and consumer brand engagement
Loureiro, S. M. C., Bilro, R. G., & Japutra, A. (2019) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-11-2018-2120 · Cited by 139
Kumar, V., & Kaushik, A. K. (2020) · Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing · doi:10.1080/10548408.2020.1757562 · Cited by 125
“Extending the notion of CBE to tourism destinations may help destination marketers in understanding and exploring ways to influence a tourist’s behavior.”
BackgroundInfluentialLuxury brands and social media: drivers and outcomes of consumer engagement on Instagram
Oliveira, M., & Fernandes, T. (2020) · Journal of Strategic Marketing · doi:10.1080/0965254x.2020.1777459 · Cited by 127
Like it or not! Brand communication on social networking sites triggers consumer‐based brand equity
Arya, V., Paul, J., & Sethi, D. (2021) · International Journal of Consumer Studies · doi:10.1111/ijcs.12763 · Cited by 143
So, K. K. F., Wei, W., & Martin, D. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.054 · Cited by 128
Exploring customer engagement in the product vs. service context
Behnam, M., Hollebeek, L. D., Clark, M. K., & Farabi, R. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102456 · Cited by 138
Self-citationCustomer–brand engagement and Facebook fan-page “Like”-intention
Halaszovich, T. F., & Nel, J. (2017) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-02-2016-1102 · Cited by 107
Chen, Y.-R. R. (2017) · Public Relations Review · doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.07.005 · Cited by 125
“Scholars have identified three dimensions of consumer engagement: cognitive engagement, affective engagement, and behavioral engagement (Brodie et al., 2013; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundInterpreting Social Identity in Online Brand Communities: Considering Posters and Lurkers
Mousavi, S., Roper, S., & Keeling, K. A. (2017) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.20995 · Cited by 117
Do value cocreation and engagement drive brand evangelism?
Harrigan, P., Roy, S. K., & Chen, T. (2020) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-10-2019-0492 · Cited by 148
Zafar, A. U., Shen, J., Shahzad, M., & Islam, T. (2020) · Sustainable Production and Consumption · doi:10.1016/j.spc.2020.11.020 · Cited by 138
Social media and luxury: A systematic literature review
Creevey, D., Coughlan, J. P., & O’Connor, C. (2021) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/ijmr.12271 · Cited by 152
“, 2018), yet it remains a strategic imperative for brands (Quach & Thaichon, 2017) consisting of cognitive, affective and behavioural dimensions (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialCustomer brand co-creation behavior: conceptualization and empirical validation
France, C., Grace, D., Merrilees, B., & Miller, D. (2018) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-10-2017-0266 · Cited by 132
Alalwan, A. A., Algharabat, R., Baabdullah, A. M., Rana, N. P., Qasem, Z., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2020) · Journal of Enterprise Information Management · doi:10.1108/jeim-07-2019-0194 · Cited by 116
Being Active in Online Communications: Firm Responsiveness and Customer Engagement Behaviour
Sheng, J. (2019) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2018.11.004 · Cited by 116
“In particular, the empirical results show a significant and positive influence of response volume on future review volume, which is in line with the conclusion in Xie et al. (2016). Besides, a novel finding in this research is that response speed is a strong indicator of firm responsiveness which positively influences…”
ResultWaqas, M., Hamzah, Z. L., & Salleh, N. A. M. (2020) · Management Review Quarterly · doi:10.1007/s11301-020-00182-w · Cited by 128
Robiady, N. D., Windasari, N. A., & Nita, A. (2020) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2020.03.001 · Cited by 116
The growing complexity of customer engagement: a systematic review
Rosado-Pinto, F., & Loureiro, S. M. C. (2020) · EuroMed Journal of Business · doi:10.1108/emjb-10-2019-0126 · Cited by 121
Chatbots in frontline services and customer experience: An anthropomorphism perspective
Nguyen, M., Casper Ferm, L., Quach, S., Pontes, N., & Thaichon, P. (2023) · Psychology & Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21882 · Cited by 119
Engaging customers during a website visit: a model of website customer engagement
Demangeot, C., & Broderick, A. J. (2016) · International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management · doi:10.1108/ijrdm-08-2015-0124 · Cited by 115
“Although a few studies have considered engagement in an online context (Mollen and Wilson, 2010; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Calder et al., 2009; Brodie et al., 2013; Pagani and Mirabello, 2011), none so far has considered the website itself as a focal object of engagement.”
BackgroundThe allure of luxury brands’ social media activities: a uses and gratifications perspective
Athwal, N., Istanbulluoglu, D., & McCormack, S. E. (2018) · Information Technology and People · doi:10.1108/itp-01-2018-0017 · Cited by 119
“Rather, a common theme across work on social media marketing is the interaction between active consumers and brands (Gallaugher and Ransbotham, 2010; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundAraujo, T., Copulsky, J. R., Hayes, J. L., Kim, S. J., & Srivastava, J. (2020) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.2020.1795756 · Cited by 141
A consumer engagement systematic review: synthesis and research agenda
Bilro, R. G., & Loureiro, S. M. C. (2020) · Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC · doi:10.1108/sjme-01-2020-0021 · Cited by 128
Verma, P. (2020) · Journal of Promotion Management · doi:10.1080/10496491.2020.1809591 · Cited by 150
Game on! How gamified loyalty programs boost customer engagement value
Hollebeek, L. D., Das, K., & Shukla, Y. S. (2021) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102308 · Cited by 141
Self-citationThe role of brand experience, brand resonance and brand trust in luxury consumption
Husain, R., Paul, J., & Köles, B. (2022) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102895 · Cited by 132
Brand authenticity: literature review, comprehensive definition, and an amalgamated scale
Campagna, C. L., Donthu, N., & Yoo, B. (2022) · The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice · doi:10.1080/10696679.2021.2018937 · Cited by 144
“…amalgamated scale of brand authenticity Our process of developing and identifying measures of brand authenticity began with our extensive brand authenticity literature review (Hollebeek et al., 2014; Sprott et al., 2009), including analysis of more than 100 papers from a diverse group of journals.”
Exploring Tourists’ Virtual Reality-Based Brand Engagement: A Uses-and-Gratifications Perspective
Rather, R. A., Hollebeek, L. D., Loureiro, S. M. C., Khan, I. M., & Hasan, R. (2023) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/00472875231166598 · Cited by 120
“…offerings, thus corroborating pre -pandemic findings addressing these theoretical associations in other contexts (e.g., Harrigan et al., 2018; Hollebeek et al., 2014) Second, the results confirmed that tourists’ VR-based brand engagement, indeed, impacts their VR-based brand-based…”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialSelf-citationHow escapism leads to behavioral intention in a virtual reality store with background music?
Loureiro, S. M. C., Guerreiro, J., & Japutra, A. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.05.035 · Cited by 125
Lafferty, B. A., Lueth, A. K., & McCafferty, R. (2016) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.20930 · Cited by 114
Community engagement and online word of mouth: An empirical investigation
Wu, J., Fan, S., & Zhao, J. L. (2017) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2017.07.002 · Cited by 112
Itani, O. S., Haddad, R. E., & Kalra, A. (2019) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101980 · Cited by 131
Consumer engagement on social media: Evidence from small retailers
Devereux, E., Grimmer, L., & Grimmer, M. R. (2019) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.1800 · Cited by 122
Physical attractiveness of service employees and customer engagement in tourism industry
Fang, S., Zhang, C., & Li, Y.-Q. (2020) · Annals of Tourism Research · doi:10.1016/j.annals.2019.102756 · Cited by 109
Measuring Customer Engagement in Social Media Marketing: A Higher-Order Model
Vinerean, S., & Opreana, A. (2021) · Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · doi:10.3390/jtaer16070145 · Cited by 197
“While defining “consumer brand engagement”, Hollebeek [18] focuses on this concept’s multidimensionality describing it as “a consumer’s positively balanced brand-related cognitive, emotional and behavioral activity during or related to focal consumer/brand interactions”.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSimon, C., Brexendorf, T. O., & Faßnacht, M. (2016) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-03-2015-0843 · Cited by 122
What makes fashion consumers “click”? Generation of eWoM engagement in social media
Ananda, A. S., Hernández-García, Á., Acquila-Natale, E., & Lamberti, L. (2019) · Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics · doi:10.1108/apjml-03-2018-0115 · Cited by 136
Latest research on brand relationships: introduction to the special issue
Fetscherin, M., án, F. G., Veloutsou, C. A., et al. (2019) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-12-2018-2167 · Cited by 111
Bridging the gap between social media and behavioral brand loyalty
Yoshida, M., Gordon, B. S., Nakazawa, M., Shibuya, S., & Fujiwara, N. (2018) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2018.02.005 · Cited by 130
Young consumers’ motivational drivers of brand engagement behavior on social media sites
Florenthal, B. (2019) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-05-2018-0064 · Cited by 139
Consumer engagement with retail firms through social media: an empirical study in Chile
Bianchi, C., & Andrews, L. (2018) · International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management · doi:10.1108/ijrdm-02-2017-0035 · Cited by 142
Consumer psychological motivations to customer brand engagement: a case of brand community
Kumar, J., & Nayak, J. K. (2019) · Journal of Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1108/jcm-01-2018-2519 · Cited by 126
Brand engagement without brand ownership: a case of non-brand owner community members
Kumar, J., & Nayak, J. K. (2019) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-04-2018-1840 · Cited by 121
Social Commerce Success: Antecedents of Purchase Intention and the Mediating Role of Trust
Dabbous, A., Barakat, K. A., & Sayegh, M. M. (2020) · Journal of Internet Commerce · doi:10.1080/15332861.2020.1756190 · Cited by 133
“Customer research defines the concept of engagement as a “psychologically based willingness to invest in the undertaking of focal interactions with particular engagement objects” (Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014).”
BackgroundSocial Commerce in Emerging Markets and its Impact on Online Community Engagement
Algharabat, R., & Rana, N. P. (2020) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-020-10041-4 · Cited by 125
“For instance, previous research discussed customer brand engagement (Hollebeek et al. 2014), customer engagement (Vivek et al.”
BackgroundBastrygina, T., Lim, W. M., Jopp, R., & Weissmann, M. A. (2024) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2024.01.007 · Cited by 108
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
