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 401–500 of 3,233
Michael, I., Ramsøy, T. Z., Balakrishnan, M. S., & Kotsi, F. (2019) · Journal of Islamic marketing · doi:10.1108/jima-09-2017-0098 · Cited by 89
“Cognitive, affective and conative dimensions are important for brand engagement and impact brand usage and self-brand connection (Hollebeek et al. (2014).”
BackgroundEliciting brand-related social media engagement: A conditional inference tree framework
Schivinski, B. (2019) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.08.045 · Cited by 82
Lu, H., & Ho, H.-C. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12104169 · Cited by 81
“The main focus of gamified marketing is (1) engagement is the consumer's performance and investment in cognition, emotion, and behavior during their interaction with the brand or in other relevant activities [26].”
BackgroundHow gamifying AI shapes customer motivation, engagement, and purchase behavior
Elmashhara, M. G., Cicco, R. D., Silva, S. C. L. D. C. E., Hammerschmidt, M., & Silva, M. L. (2023) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21912 · Cited by 86
“…have treated customer engagement as a unified construct, chiefly referring to behavioral engagement, numerous investigations call to regard engagement as a multi-dimensional construct that encompasses cognitive, emotional, and behavioral elements (Hollebeek et al., 2014; Kumar et al., 2019).”
BackgroundGatzweiler, A., Blažević, V., & Piller, F. T. (2017) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.12369 · Cited by 82
Consumer-Brand Relationships under the Marketing 3.0 Paradigm: A Literature Review
Suárez, M. G., Martínez‐Ruiz, M. P., & Martínez‐Caraballo, N. (2017) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00252 · Cited by 81
“In order to measure customer brand engagement (CBE), Hollebeek et al. (2014) and Vivek et al. (2014) develop and validate CBE scales in different settings.”
BackgroundWhat s-commerce implies? Repurchase intention and its antecedents
Lim, X., Cheah, J., Waller, D. S., Ting, H., & Ng, S. I. (2019) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-03-2019-0145 · Cited by 98
Role of social media on mobile banking adoption among consumers
Sharma, M., Banerjee, S., & Paul, J. (2022) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121720 · Cited by 94
“This construct addresses users ’ requirement of being updated with the latest trends and assists them in decision-making (Kaur et al., 2018; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Dholakia et al., 2009).”
BackgroundMarketing and social networks: a criterion for detecting opinion leaders
Litterio, A. M., Nantes, E. A., Larrosa, J. M. C., & Gómez, L. J. (2017) · European Journal of Management and Business Economics · doi:10.1108/ejmbe-10-2017-020 · Cited by 81
“Propensity to interact in online media has been defined as a personal trait and scales have been developed to measure it (Blazevic et al., 2014; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundBusiness social media analytics: Characterization and conceptual framework
Holsapple, C. W., Hsiao, S., & Pakath, R. (2018) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2018.03.004 · Cited by 98
Uzunoğlu, E., Türkel, S., & Akyar, B. Y. (2017) · Public Relations Review · doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.03.013 · Cited by 80
Gillani, A., Kutaula, S., Leonidou, L. C., & Christodoulides, P. (2019) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-019-04278-6 · Cited by 89
Virtual reality and gamification in marketing higher education: a review and research agenda
Loureiro, S. M. C., Bilro, R. G., & Angelino, F. J. D. A. (2020) · Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC · doi:10.1108/sjme-01-2020-0013 · Cited by 109
Tak, P., & Gupta, M. (2021) · Journal of Internet Commerce · doi:10.1080/15332861.2021.1891517 · Cited by 89
“Previous studies suggest that repeated interactions with the consumers help in strengthening the emotional, psychological and physical bond that a customer has with the provider is referred as consumer engagement (Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014; Tsai and Men 2013; Phang, Zhang, and Sutanto 2013).”
BackgroundMirbagheri, S., & Najmi, M. (2019) · Psychology & Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21185 · Cited by 71
Taiminen, K., & Ranaweera, C. (2019) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-10-2017-0794 · Cited by 92
Zhang, J., & Du, M. (2020) · Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing · doi:10.1108/jbim-06-2018-0190 · Cited by 78
Customer brand engagement during service lockdown
Hollebeek, L. D., Smith, D. L., Kasabov, E., Hammedi, W., Warlow, A., & Clark, M. K. (2020) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-05-2020-0199 · Cited by 82
Self-citationOsei-Frimpong, K., McLean, G., Islam, N., & Otoo, B. A. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.057 · Cited by 100
Lin, J.-S., & Wu, L. (2022) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2022.107488 · Cited by 90
Anbumathi, R., Dorai, S., & Palaniappan, U. (2022) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103181 · Cited by 81
Hsu, C. (2023) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2023.114020 · Cited by 116
Zeqiri, J., Koku, P. S., Dobre, C., Milovan, A.-M., Hasani, V. V., & Paientko Tetiana, V. (2024) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-06-2023-0248 · Cited by 169
Vohra, A., & Bhardwaj, N. (2017) · Journal of Marketing Communications · doi:10.1080/13527266.2017.1393768 · Cited by 81
“Further, membership duration should also be explored as a possible segmentation criterion for social media users, while also assessing for differences in engagement within brand interactions as proposed by Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie (2014).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSiepmann, C., Holthoff, L. C., & Kowalczuk, P. (2021) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-08-2020-3047 · Cited by 62
Exploring the involvement-patronage link in the phygital retail experiences
Banik, S. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102739 · Cited by 91
Driving marketing outcomes through social media-based customer engagement
Kulikovskaja, V., Hubert, M., Grunert, K. G., & Hong, Z. (2023) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103445 · Cited by 78
Customer engagement with brands in social media platforms
Carlson, J., Gudergan, S. P., Gelhard, C., & Rahman, M. M. (2019) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-10-2017-0741 · Cited by 94
Friend or foe? Customer engagement’s value-based effects on fellow customers and the firm
Clark, M. K., Lages, C. R., & Hollebeek, L. D. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.011 · Cited by 87
Self-citationDhanesh, G. S., Picherit‐Duthler, G., & Li, K. (2022) · Public Relations Review · doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2022.102174 · Cited by 93
Tian, S.-Y., Su, Y.-O.-C., Jia, X., Sun, R.-Y., & Tsai, W. (2023) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-02-2022-3879 · Cited by 57
Stakeholder engagement in intra- and inter-organizational innovation
Jonas, J. M., Boha, J., Sörhammar, D., & Moeslein, K. M. (2018) · Journal of service management · doi:10.1108/josm-09-2016-0239 · Cited by 90
“Although the recent literature (Gummerus et al., 2012; Brodie et al., 2013; Hollebeek et al., 2014) tends to present high engagement as an ideal state, the present findings indicate that while inter-organizational engagement is not always high, intra-organizational innovation results are generally excellent.”
BackgroundViolante, M. G., Vezzetti, E., & Piazzolla, P. (2019) · International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) · doi:10.1007/s12008-018-00528-5 · Cited by 83
“Cognitive engagement has been defined as a set of enduring and active mental states experienced by the consumer [73, 77, 78].”
BackgroundKumar, J. (2020) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-04-2018-0290 · Cited by 70
Qing, T., & Haiying, D. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102486 · Cited by 77
He, J., & Zhang, S. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.01.004 · Cited by 76
Tyrväinen, O., Karjaluoto, H., & Ukpabi, D. C. (2023) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1177/10949968231157281 · Cited by 93
Patrizi, M., Šerić, M., & Vernuccio, M. (2023) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103659 · Cited by 91
An empirical study of the antecedents and consequences of brand engagement
Wong, H. Y., & Merrilees, B. (2015) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-08-2014-0145 · Cited by 77
Integrative qualities and dimensions of social commerce: Toward a unified view
Hu, T. “., Dai, H., & Salam, A. F. (2018) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2018.09.003 · Cited by 75
The rules of engagement: how to motivate consumers to engage with branded mobile apps
Stocchi, L., Michaelidou, N., Pourazad, N., & Micevski, M. (2018) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2018.1544167 · Cited by 89
“This fi nding is consistent with the work of Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie (2014) regarding consumer engagement in social media, and Wirtz et al. ’ s (2013) work on online communities.”
ResultCustomer engagement in an e-commerce brand community
Vohra, A., & Bhardwaj, N. (2019) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-01-2018-0003 · Cited by 80
Chu, S., Kamal, S., & Kim, Y. (2019) · Journal of Global Fashion Marketing · doi:10.1080/20932685.2018.1550008 · Cited by 83
France, C., Grace, D., Iacono, J. L., & Carlini, J. (2020) · Journal of Brand Management · doi:10.1057/s41262-020-00194-7 · Cited by 89
Agyei, J., Sun, S., Penney, E. K., Abrokwah, E., & Ofori-Boafo, R. (2021) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/21582440211040113 · Cited by 93
“These can be critical to the realization of higher firm performance results such as growth in sales, brand referrals, enriched cocreative experiences, and superior profitability (Hollebeek et al., 2014; Loureiro & Lopes, 2019).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialDesigning a seamless shopping journey through omnichannel retailer integration
Cocco, H., & Demoulin, N. T. M. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.06.031 · Cited by 86
Gutiérrez, A., Punjaisri, K., Desai, B., Alwi, S. F. S., O’Leary, S., Chaiyasoonthorn, W., & Chaveesuk, S. (2023) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103272 · Cited by 100
Engaging Gen Y Customers in Online Brand Communities: A Cross-National Assessment
Carlson, J., Rahman, S. M., Rahman, M. M., Wyllie, J., & Voola, R. (2020) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102252 · Cited by 74
Marques, I. R., Casais, B., & Camilleri, M. A. (2021) · Strategic Corporate Communication in the Digital Age · doi:10.1108/978-1-80071-264-520211008 · Cited by 75
Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of customer engagement: a bibliometric analysis
Srivastava, M., & Sivaramakrishnan, S. (2021) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-11-2020-0483 · Cited by 57
Mathur, S., Tewari, A., & Singh, A. (2021) · Journal of Marketing Communications · doi:10.1080/13527266.2021.1936126 · Cited by 74
“Customer engagement and brand engagement concepts reflect a highly similar conceptual scope (Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014).”
BackgroundMethodHoliday, S., Hayes, J. L., Park, H., Lyu, Y., & Zhou, Y. (2023) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1177/10949968231171104 · Cited by 88
“Employing consumer brand engagement (CBE; Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014), psychological sense of community (PSoC; Glynn 1981; Sarason 1988), and the behavioral ecology view of facial expressions (Fridlund 1991a, b), this research explicates the in fl uence of deliberately curated content that…”
How virtual brand community traces may increase fan engagement in brand pages
Rosenthal, B. M., & Brito, E. P. Z. (2017) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2017.01.009 · Cited by 81
“…to the brand (Casaló, Flavián, & Guinalíu, 2008); positive word-of-mouth (Kumar et al., 2010); self-brand connections and brand usage intent (Hollebeek, Glynn, & Brodie, 2014); trust, loyalty, satisfaction and empowerment (Brodie et al., 2013); and customer knowledge value (Kumar et al.,…”
BackgroundCustomer engagement for evaluating customer relationships in hotel industry
Rather, R. A., & Sharma, J. (2017) · European journal of tourism, hospitality and recreation · doi:10.1515/ejthr-2017-0001 · Cited by 85
Kumar, J., & Nayak, J. K. (2018) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.08.007 · Cited by 83
Ferm, L. C., & Thaichon, P. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102548 · Cited by 90
#COVID-19: Forms and drivers of social media users’ engagement behavior toward a global crisis
Azer, J., Blasco‐Arcas, L., & Harrigan, P. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.06.030 · Cited by 77
“…conceptualized the construct of engagement (e.g., Azer & Alexander, 2018; Blasco-Arcas et al., 2020; Bowden et al., 2017; Brodie et al., 2013; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Jaakkola & Alexander, 2014; Naumann et al., 2020) and identified different antecedents and outcomes (e. g., Azer & Alexander,…”
BackgroundDzandu, M. D., Hanu, C., & Amegbe, H. (2022) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122049 · Cited by 73
Liu, L., Liu, R., Lee, M., & Chen, J. (2019) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/intr-05-2017-0177 · Cited by 80
Antecedents and consequences of luxury brand engagement in social media
Brandão, A., Pinho, E., & Rodrigues, P. C. L. (2019) · Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC · doi:10.1108/sjme-11-2018-0052 · Cited by 81
Tsai, C., Hsu, H., & Chen, C. (2020) · Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management · doi:10.1080/19368623.2020.1706684 · Cited by 71
Customer engagement and employee engagement: systematic review and future directions
Chandni, S., & Rahman, Z. (2020) · Service Industries Journal · doi:10.1080/02642069.2020.1733534 · Cited by 73
The effect of image richness on customer engagement: Evidence from Sina Weibo
Zhao, L., Zhang, M., Ming, Y., Niu, T., & Wang, Y. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113307 · Cited by 82
Chen, H., Wang, P., & Hao, S. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2024.108448 · Cited by 92
Epilogue to the Special Issue and reflections on the future of engagement research
Hollebeek, L. D., Conduit, J., Sweeney, J., Soutar, G. N., Karpen, I. O., Jarvis, W., & Chen, T. (2016) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2016.1144340 · Cited by 84
“regarding the nature, dynamics and relationships characterising the unfolding of engagement over time (Hollebeek et al., 2014), which, therefore, also merits further scrutiny in future research.”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationEngaging luxury brand consumers on social media
Kumar, V., Khan, I. M., Fatma, M., & Singh, A. (2022) · Journal of Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1108/jcm-10-2020-4175 · Cited by 72
Ma, L., Ou, W., & Lee, C. S. (2022) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2022.101179 · Cited by 91
Aljarah, A., Sawaftah, D., Ibrahim, B., & Lahuerta-Otero, E. (2022) · European Journal of Innovation Management · doi:10.1108/ejim-05-2022-0259 · Cited by 90
Qayyum, A., Jamil, R. A., Shah, A. M., & Lee, K. Y. (2023) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103515 · Cited by 78
Gupta, Y., & Khan, F. M. (2024) · Journal of Modelling in Management · doi:10.1108/jm2-01-2023-0016 · Cited by 105
Establishing measures and drivers of consumer brand engagement behaviours
Dwivedi, A., Wilkie, D. C. H., Johnson, L. W., & Weerawardena, J. (2016) · Journal of Brand Management · doi:10.1057/s41262-016-0001-9 · Cited by 77
Drivers and outcomes of consumer engagement
Glavee-Geo, R., Shaikh, A. A., Karjaluoto, H., & Hinson, R. E. (2019) · International Journal of Bank Marketing · doi:10.1108/ijbm-01-2019-0007 · Cited by 86
Bailey, A. A., Bonifield, C. M., & Elhai, J. D. (2020) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102348 · Cited by 73
Agrawal, S. R., & Mittal, D. (2022) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102966 · Cited by 77
Ibrahim, B., & Aljarah, A. (2023) · European Journal of Innovation Management · doi:10.1108/ejim-08-2022-0452 · Cited by 97
Lin, Y.-H., Hsu, C., Chen, M., & Fang, C. (2016) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2016.08.019 · Cited by 74
Chen, K., & Cheung, H. L. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.007 · Cited by 82
Yost, E., Zhang, T. C., & Qi, R. (2020) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.10.008 · Cited by 78
Hollebeek, L. D., Hammedi, W., & Sprott, D. E. (2023) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21807 · Cited by 95
Self-citationSocial value, content value, and brand equity in social media brand communities
Jiao, Y., Ertz, M., Jo, M., & Sarigöllü, E. (2018) · International Marketing Review · doi:10.1108/imr-07-2016-0132 · Cited by 80
Engagement, satisfaction and customer behavior-based CRM performance
Marino, V., & Presti, L. L. (2018) · Journal of Service Theory and Practice · doi:10.1108/jstp-11-2017-0222 · Cited by 73
Are households ready to engage with smart home technology?
Mulcahy, R. F., Letheren, K., McAndrew, R., Glavas, C., & Russell‐Bennett, R. (2019) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2019.1680568 · Cited by 67
“Further, while consumer engagement measures consumers’ interactions with objects, the majority of studies focus on online consumer–brand engagement (e.g. Dessart, Veloutsou, & Morgan-Thomas, 2016; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialConsumer intentions to engage in s-commerce: a cross-national study.
Bianchi, C., Andrews, L., Wiese, M., & Fazal-E-Hasan, S. (2017) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2017.1319406 · Cited by 68
The Impact of Social Media Marketing on Brand Trust and Brand Loyalty
Sohail, M. S., Hasan, M., & Sohail, A. F. (2019) · International Journal of Online Marketing · doi:10.4018/ijom.2020010102 · Cited by 107
Hwang, A. H., & Oh, J. (2019) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101928 · Cited by 77
“Besides, scholars also agree that cognitive engagement commonly leads to behavioral commitment, such as learning, sharing and advocating a brand and its products (Brodie et al., 2013; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundWörfel, P., Frentz, F., & Tautu, C. (2022) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-07-2020-0510 · Cited by 84
Yang, J., Cao, C., Ye, C., & Shi, Y. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14127110 · Cited by 70
Schena, R., Secundo, G., Fano, D. D., Vecchio, P. D., & Russo, A. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.07.025 · Cited by 78
Higher education brand alliances: Investigating consumers' dual-degree purchase intentions
Naidoo, V., & Hollebeek, L. D. (2016) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.027 · Cited by 69
Self-citationJabreel, M., Moreno, A., & Huertas, A. (2016) · Journal of Destination Marketing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2016.03.004 · Cited by 68
Gruzd, A. A., Lannigan, J., & Quigley, K. F. F. (2018) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2018.09.005 · Cited by 81
Shafiee, M. M., Tabaeeian, R. A., & Khoshfetrat, A. (2020) · Tourism and Hospitality Research · doi:10.1177/1467358420914373 · Cited by 67
“However, other researchers have regarded it as a series of recurring interactions between a customer and a company (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundHow personalized advertising affects equity of brands advertised on Facebook? A mediation mechanism
Tran, T. P., Lin, C.-W. W., Baalbaki, S., & án, F. G. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.027 · Cited by 80
Naqvi, M. H. A., Jiang, Y., & Naqvi, M. H. (2020) · Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics · doi:10.1108/apjml-01-2020-0053 · Cited by 72
Customer Engagement in Sport: An Updated Review and Research Agenda
McDonald, H., Biscaia, R., Yoshida, M., Conduit, J., & Doyle, J. P. (2022) · Journal of Sport Management · doi:10.1123/jsm.2021-0233 · Cited by 76
“…different dimensions within different, but related, structural components (antecedents and outcomes – see Figure antecedents have included consumer involvement (Hollebeek, 2014), positive affect identification and BIRGing (Yoshida et al., 2014) as well as individual and game (Stadner et al., 2016).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialValiño, P. C., Rodríguez, P. G., Henche, B. G., & Núñez‐Barriopedro, E. (2023) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21940 · Cited by 68
Scale Development and Validation for Measuring Online Engagement
Paruthi, M., & Kaur, H. (2017) · Journal of Internet Commerce · doi:10.1080/15332861.2017.1299497 · Cited by 70
“After examining the existing scales (Vivek et al. 2014; Hollebeek et al. 2014; Baldus et al. 2015; Dessart et al. 2016) on consumer engagement, it was observed that most of the instruments were developed and tested in Western economies of the world where individualistic culture exists.”
BackgroundInfluentialShopping in the digital world: How augmented reality mobile applications trigger customer engagement
Lin, K.-Y., & Huang, T. K. (2024) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102540 · Cited by 66
Integrating technology to service innovation
Lee, M., Ahn, J., Shin, M., Kwon, W., & Back, K. (2019) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology · doi:10.1108/jhtt-01-2019-0013 · Cited by 75
Psychological engagement drives brand loyalty: evidence from Malaysian ecotourism destinations
Quoquab, F., Mohammad, J., & Sobri, A. M. M. (2020) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-09-2019-2558 · Cited by 74
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
