The DOI matches its Crossref record; 105 of the 110 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 2 of the 29 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development and Validation
Open accessAbstract
In the last three decades, an influential research stream has emerged which highlights the dynamics of focal consumer/brand relationships. Specifically, more recently the ‘consumer brand engagement’ (CBE) concept has been postulated to more comprehensively reflect the nature of consumers’ particular interactive brand relationships, relative to traditional concepts, including ‘involvement.’ However, despite the growing scholarly interest regarding the undertaking of marketing research addressing ‘engagement,’ studies have been predominantly exploratory in nature, thus generating a lack of empirical research in this area to date. By developing and validating a CBE scale in specific social media settings, we address this identified literature gap. Specifically, we conceptualize CBE as a consumer's positively valenced brand-related cognitive, emotional and behavioral activity during or related to focal consumer/brand interactions. We derive three CBE dimensions, including cognitive processing, affection, and activation. Within three different social media contexts, we employ exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to develop a reliable, 10-item CBE scale, which we proceed to validate within a nomological net of conceptual relationships and a rival model. The findings suggest that while consumer brand ‘involvement’ acts as a CBE antecedent, consumer ‘self-brand connection’ and ‘brand usage intent’ represent key CBE consequences, thus providing a platform for further research…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
49 Own result · 21 Own interpretation · 9 No full text of the sources · 8 Sources not found · 8 Own method · 7 No basis given · 2 Couldn’t confirm · 1 Not checked yet · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“the qualitative study shows consumer conceptions of CBE are aligned with key findings addressing the 'engagement' concept in prior research (Brodie et al. 2011;Leeflang 2011).”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 2 about here
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Brodie et al. 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Could not verifycites Leeflang 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The available Abstract describes the formalization of marketing and future developments, while the metadata lists customer engagement only as a keyword. Searches for consumer conceptions of CBE, qualitative findings, and the engagement concept found no passage addressing whether those conceptions align with prior research. (LLM, conf=0.71)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In an additional EFA including only the 10 retained CBE items, the scree plot and the eigen values exceeding 1.0 concurred in suggesting the suitability of a threefactor solution for CBE, which explained 69.63% of the total variance.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Results
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For these brands, the respondents exhibited a substantially lower willingness to exert cognitive, emotional or behavioral activity in their brand interactions”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 2 about here
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“we observed the scree in the scree plot at three factors; thus corresponding to our hypothesized three-factor model of CBE.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Results
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Cattell 1966 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The attained Cronbach alphas for the scale were: (i) Cognitive processing: .825;”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fit statistics for the re-estimated model were as follows: χ 2 (53) = 464.9(p=0.000); and χ 2 /df = 8.72, GFI = .865;CFI = .922;RMSEA = .118;and SRMR = .048;thus indicating a worse fit, relative to the three-factor model.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the audio recorded findings suggested that consumers predominantly equated their 'engagement' with their selected brands to specific brand interactions.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 2 about here
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“while consumer brand 'involvement' acts as a CBE antecedent”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the results indicated that for perceived 'highly engaging' brands consumers, typically, appeared willing to exert considerable cognitive, emotional and behavioral activity in their brand interactions”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 2 about here
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We derive three CBE dimensions, including cognitive processing, affection, and activation.”
- Also stated in: § CBE Conceptual Development · plain
“we propose three CBE dimensions, which correspond to the generic cognitive, emotional and behavioral nature of 'engagement.'”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § CBE Conceptual Development · plain
- Probably not a substantial claim. 11
- It may state two separate claims as one. 14
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“As such, this research responds directly to the Marketing Science Institute's (MSI 2010), Leeflang's (2011), and Brodie et al.'s (2011) call for the undertaking of 'engagement'-based scale development research.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites MSI 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Could not verifycites Leeflang (2011) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The indexed Abstract describes a broad agenda for developing marketing research, and the keywords include customer engagement. Searches for engagement-based scale development and customer-engagement measures returned no passage in our copy calling for that research; the retrieved text does not establish the specific attribution to Leeflang. (LLM, conf=0.72)
- Not matchedcites Brodie et al. (2011)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we employ exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to develop a reliable, 10-item CBE scale”
- Also stated in: § Results · plain
“resulting in a three-factor, 10-item CBE scale for further analysis.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Abstract
plainn = 200- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Results · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The item screening generated a reduced pool of 39 CBE items.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we retained 12 items for the 'cognitive processing,' 15 items for the 'affection,' and 12 items for the 'activation' dimensions of CBE for further analysis.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Reliability (internal consistency) analyses using Cronbach's alpha indicated the scale had good reliability: (i) Cognitive processing: .753;(ii) Affection: .839;(iii) Activation: .776;and (iv) Overall 10-item CBE scale: .823.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Results
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The attained Cronbach alphas for the scale were: (i) Cognitive processing: .825;(ii) Affection: .907; (iii) Activation: .894;and (iv) Overall CBE scale: .933.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The results in Figure 1 suggested excellent model fit (Iacobucci 2010: p. 91): χ 2 (32) = 97.994(p=0.000); and χ 2 /df = 3.06.Further, GFI = .968;CFI = .984;RMSEA = .061;and SRMR = .0278;thus corroborating the excellent model fit to the data”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The regression weights (βs) for each of the items onto their intended factor were significant (e.g.AFFECTION → AFFEC.1: .895);and all standardized coefficients .50;suggesting that each of the items should remain in the model”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, while we found consumers' brand-related 'affection' (.426) and 'activation' (.402) in specific consumer/brand interactions to exert a similar significant effect on individuals' ensuing 'brand usage intent,' consumers' level of 'cognitive processing' (.045) failed to produce a significant effect.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Hypothesis Testing Results
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“which indicated that discriminant validity was attained for 14 of the 15 possible construct pairs; that is, with the exception of COG.PROC.-AFFEC.(Table 5).”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Model Results
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fornell and Larcker 1981a/b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Each of the squared multiple correlations exceeded .50;also indicating good item reliability.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Model Results
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The regression coefficients indicated that each of the items made a significant contribution to the measurement of its intended construct, thus contributing to the model's convergent validity.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Model Results
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fit statistics for the calibration sample are: χ 2 (243) = 653.561(p=0.000); and χ 2 /df = 2.69, GFI = .824;CFI = .932;RMSEA = .078;and SRMR = .0616;the validation sample: χ 2 (243) = 666.7 (p=0.000);χ 2 /df = 2.77, GFI = .817;CFI = .938;RMSEA = .079;and SRMR = .0516.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 5 about here
plainn = 278- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Highly similar results were attained across both sub-samples (Table 6), which also exhibited significant resemblance to the results for the full sample (Alwin and Jackson 1981).”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Table 5 about here
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Alwin and Jackson 1981
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedn = 278- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Fourth, 'engagement' plays a central role in a nomological net of focal conceptual relationships (Brodie et al. 2011)”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Table 1 about here
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Brodie et al. 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As such, study 3 confirmed the CBE scale representing a valid, reliable and stable measurement instrument.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Insert Figure 1 about here
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“more recently the 'consumer brand engagement' (CBE) concept has been postulated to more comprehensively reflect the nature of consumers' particular interactive brand relationships, relative to traditional concepts, including 'involvement.'”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Brodie et al. 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“'engagement' reflects a motivational state (Van Doorn et al. 2010), which occurs by virtue of an individual's (i.e. the 'engagement subject') focal interactive experiences with a particular object or agent”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Table 1 about here
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Van Doorn et al. 2010 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“studies have been predominantly exploratory in nature; thus generating a lack of empirical research in this area to date.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and as such, may be useful for scholars and managers seeking to predict specific consumer behavior outcomes;”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, this paper contributes insights regarding the potential role of CBE in the advancement of the broader theoretical perspectives of relationship marketing, S-D logic and consumer culture theory, which are centered upon the importance of establishing and maintaining value-laden, interactive and co-creative consumer/brand interactions and relationships.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a result, consumers' CBE levels with a focal brand may fluctuate: (i) During (i.e.within) a particular brand interaction; and (ii) Across brand interactions over time.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Contributions, Limitations & Implications Academic Implications
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, we expect managerial cultivation of CBE to generate enhanced consumer brand retention and loyalty outcomes.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Managerial Implications
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Represents a promising, under-explored concept to date;”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“thus indicating that not only does CBE have a positive effect on consumer 'self-brand connection,' but CBE explains most of the variance observed for this construct.”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Hypothesis Testing Results
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
The selected social media brands (Facebook.com, Twitter.com, LinkedIn.com) are representative of social media contexts for studying CBE.
“Within three different social media contexts, we employ exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to develop a reliable, 10-item CBE scale”
“we selected the brand Facebook.comfor investigation”
“we selected the social media brand Twitter.com for investigation”
The paper relies on this without support.
The causal direction is from consumer brand involvement through CBE to self-brand connection and brand usage intent, not the reverse.
“we identified a mediating effect of CBE in the association between consumer brand 'involvement' and 'brand usage intent.'”
The paper relies on this without support.
The nomological net includes all relevant mediating variables.
“which implies there are no omitted mediating variables, and the mediating hypotheses are supported.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Study 2: CBE Measurement Assessment & Scale Dimensionality
“We selected a social media setting in studies 1-3”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Study 1: Consumer Conceptions of 'Consumer Brand Engagement' (CBE)
“We instructed the participants to select a brand in any category that is 'highly engaging' to them”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“| Activation | .72 | .67 | .75 | .69 | .46 | .49 | | Self-Brand | .84 | .74 | .86 | .86 | .75 | .45 |”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
Reported 0.46 · recomputed 0.7396
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“| Affection | .84 | .85 | .76 | .57 | .74 | .46 | | Activation | .72 | .67 | .75 | .69 | .46 | .49 | | Self-Brand | .84 | .74 | .86 | .86 | .75 | .45 | | Connection | | | | | | | | Brand Usage | .67 | .64 | .74 | .70 | .67 | .76 |”
§ Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development & Validation > Brand usage intent
Reported 0.46 · recomputed 0.5476
Citations
Cites
Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151312 · Cited by 109,314
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
(1975) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 36,737
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/brm.40.3.879 · Cited by 34,117
On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/bf02723327 · Cited by 26,163
Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity
Keller, K. L. (1993) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299305700101 · Cited by 24,648
Structural Equations with Latent Variables
Bollen, K. A. (1989) · Wiley series in probability and statistics · doi:10.1002/9781118619179 · Cited by 17,944
Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003 · Cited by 17,875
Structural Equations with Latent Variables.
Clogg, C. C., & Bollen, K. A. (1991) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2072165 · Cited by 17,475
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Bezjian-Avery A., 1998, Journal of Advertising Research, 38, 23
- Menard Scott Longitudinal Research, 2e, Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences No. 76 2002 Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications
- Patterson Paul, Ting Yu., De Ruyter Ko Understanding Customer Engagement in Services 2006 AZMAC Proceedings Brisbane
- Prahalad Coimbatore K., 2004, Journal of Marketing, 68, 23
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 501–600 of 3,233
Effectiveness of engagement initiatives across engagement platforms: A meta-analysis
Blut, M., Kulikovskaja, V., Hubert, M., Brock, C., & Grewal, D. (2023) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-023-00925-7 · Cited by 83
Effect of Cognitive Engagement on the Development of Brand Love in a Hotel Context
Shin, M., & Back, K. (2019) · Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research · doi:10.1177/1096348019890055 · Cited by 74
“For instance, Hollebeek et al. (2014) proposed a three-dimensional (cognitive, affective, and behavioral) engagement conceptualization and So et al. (2014) introduced a five-dimensional conceptualization of CBE for hospitality and tourism brands.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialEffects of socialization interactions on customer engagement in online travel communities
Luo, N., Wang, Y., Jin, C., Ni, Y., & Zhang, M. (2019) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/intr-08-2018-0354 · Cited by 69
Consumer engagement behaviors: do service convenience and organizational characteristics matter?
Roy, S. K., Shekhar, V., Quazi, A. M., & Quaddus, M. (2020) · Journal of Service Theory and Practice · doi:10.1108/jstp-03-2018-0049 · Cited by 76
Yun, J. H., Rosenberger, P. J., & Sweeney, K. (2020) · Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics · doi:10.1108/apjml-07-2019-0444 · Cited by 87
Atiq, M., Abid, G., Anwar, A., & Ijaz, M. F. (2022) · Information · doi:10.3390/info13070345 · Cited by 135
Digital customer engagement: A systematic literature review and research agenda
Srivastava, R., Gupta, P., Kumar, H., & Tuli, N. (2023) · Australian Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/03128962231177096 · Cited by 115
“Self-brand connection refers to “the extent to which individuals have incorporated [a focal] brand(s) into their self-concept” (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
InfluentialValue co-creation on social media
Lin, S., Yang, S., Ma, M., & Huang, J. (2018) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-08-2016-0484 · Cited by 69
Social media brand engagement in the context of collaborative consumption: the case of AIRBNB
Schivinski, B., Langaro, D., Fernandes, T., & án, F. G. (2020) · Journal of Brand Management · doi:10.1057/s41262-020-00207-5 · Cited by 69
Factors Increasing Consumer Engagement of Branded Content in Instagram
Cuevas-Molano, E., Matosas-López, L., & Bravo, C. B. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3121186 · Cited by 99
“b) Few empirical studies have considered the empirical evidence of the CE construct in the context of brand fan pages [7], [19], [20] which are new and crucial social media phenomena to investigate this term.”
BackgroundThe Effect of Social Media Activities on Brand Loyalty for Banks: The Role of Brand Trust
Althuwaini, S. (2022) · Administrative Sciences · doi:10.3390/admsci12040148 · Cited by 64
Role of customer perceived brand ethicality in inducing engagement in online brand communities
Kumar, V., Kaushal, V., & Shashi, S. (2022) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103184 · Cited by 63
Drivers and outcomes of brand engagement in self-concept for luxury fashion brands
Nyadzayo, M. W., Johnson, L. W., & Rossi, M. (2020) · Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management · doi:10.1108/jfmm-05-2018-0070 · Cited by 86
Eberhardt, W., Brüggen, E. C., Post, T., & Hoet, C. (2020) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2020.11.002 · Cited by 66
Exploring technology satisfaction: An approach through the flow experience
Calvo-Porral, C., Faíña-Medín, A., & Nieto-Mengotti, M. (2016) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.008 · Cited by 62
Saleem, M. A., Li, J., & Afzal, H. (2020) · Journal of Sustainable Tourism · doi:10.1080/09669582.2020.1835932 · Cited by 62
“Tourism studies of brand engagement Brand Engagement (BE) is derived from Customer Engagement, the behaviour-oriented conceptin the field of marketing (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialSatar, M. S., Rather, R. A., Cheema, S., Parrey, S. H., Ghaderi, Z., & Cain, L. (2023) · Tourism Review · doi:10.1108/tr-10-2022-0489 · Cited by 63
Koob, C. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0249457 · Cited by 105
A Systematic Mapping Study on Customer Loyalty and Brand Management
Tartaglione, A. M., Cavacece, Y., Russo, G. M., & Granata, G. (2019) · Administrative Sciences · doi:10.3390/admsci9010008 · Cited by 84
Chen, X., Sun, X., Yan, D., & Wen, D. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12072674 · Cited by 66
“Based on the definition in this paper, commitment refers to a customer’s strong intention to keep the transaction relationship with a focal object [32], while CE refers to a customer’s attitudinal and behavioral investment beyond purchase [16].”
BackgroundKhôi, N. H., & Le, A. N. H. (2022) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-10-2021-1230 · Cited by 64
A construal level view of contemporary heritage tourism
Scarpi, D., & Raggiotto, F. (2022) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2022.104648 · Cited by 62
Goyal, A., & Verma, P. (2022) · Journal of Strategic Marketing · doi:10.1080/0965254x.2022.2149839 · Cited by 76
“This paper considers the widely used Hollebeek et al.‘s framework (Hollebeek et al., 2014) of customer brand engagement.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialAhmad, N., Ahmad, A., & Siddique, I. (2023) · Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · doi:10.1002/csr.2701 · Cited by 66
Destination engagement on Facebook: Time and seasonality
Villamediana, J., Boluda, I. K., & López, N. V. (2019) · Annals of Tourism Research · doi:10.1016/j.annals.2019.102747 · Cited by 65
Effects of enduring involvement and perceived content vividness on digital engagement
Vazquez, E. E. (2019) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-05-2018-0071 · Cited by 61
Rasool, A., Shah, F. A., & Tanveer, M. (2021) · Journal of Internet Commerce · doi:10.1080/15332861.2021.1889818 · Cited by 68
“The central construct of the study i,e., CE was measured through Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie (2014) scale.”
MethodElsharnouby, M. H., Mohsen, J., Saeed, O. T., & Mahrous, A. A. (2021) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-05-2020-0107 · Cited by 62
Consumer Neuroscience and Digital/Social Media Health/Social Cause Advertisement Effectiveness
Harris, J. M., Ciorciari, J., & Gountas, J. (2019) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs9040042 · Cited by 66
Claffey, E., & Brady, M. (2019) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2019.1601125 · Cited by 68
“It is also proposed that highly satisfied (commonly measured as a cognitive response) customers, have higher customer loyalty values and also refer other customers more frequently in a virtual environment (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundRamos, C. M. Q., & Molina, A. M. C. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.061 · Cited by 65
How less congruent new products drive brand engagement: The role of curiosity
Gerrath, M. H. E. E., & Biraglia, A. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.01.014 · Cited by 68
Mainolfi, G., & Vergura, D. T. (2021) · Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management · doi:10.1108/jfmm-03-2020-0050 · Cited by 79
Exploring the Determinants of Users’ Continuance Usage Intention of Smart Voice Assistants
Pal, D., Babakerkhell, M. D., & Zhang, X. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3132399 · Cited by 62
“The user engagement concept is more prevalent in an online brand community setting [14, 28, 29, 41] and is an under-researched construct related to the adoption of smart-products.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialWang, K., Tai, J. C. F., & Hu, H.-F. (2022) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2022.103136 · Cited by 59
Rather, R. A., Raisinghani, M., Gligor, D. M., Parrey, S. H., Russo, I., & Bozkurt, S. (2023) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103451 · Cited by 63
The impact of consumer-brand engagement on brand experience and behavioural intentions
Risitano, M., Romano, R., Sorrentino, A., & Quintano, M. (2017) · British Food Journal · doi:10.1108/bfj-11-2016-0579 · Cited by 66
Millennial’s engagement with fashion brands
Nagaraj, S., & Singh, S. (2018) · Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management · doi:10.1108/jfmm-04-2018-0045 · Cited by 61
Predictors of tourist engagement: Travel motives and tourism destination profiles
Villamediana-Pedrosa, J. D., López, N. V., & Boluda, I. K. (2020) · Journal of Destination Marketing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100412 · Cited by 64
Neuroscience research in consumer behavior: A review and future research agenda
Oliveira, P. M., Guerreiro, J., & Rita, P. (2022) · International Journal of Consumer Studies · doi:10.1111/ijcs.12800 · Cited by 70
The role of staff engagement in facilitating staff-led value co-creation
Merrilees, B., Miller, D., & Yakimova, R. (2017) · Journal of service management · doi:10.1108/josm-10-2015-0326 · Cited by 59
“The pairing of engagement and co-creation draws inspiration from the customer co-creation literature, where both co-creation and engagement seem to associate with each other (Brodie et al., 2013; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundChiang, C., Wei, C., Parker, K. R., & Davey, B. (2017) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2017.1399922 · Cited by 60
VALUE CO-CREATION THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA: A CASE STUDY OF A START-UP COMPANY
Kim, J., & Choi, H. (2019) · Journal of Business Economics and Management · doi:10.3846/jbem.2019.6262 · Cited by 75
Loureiro, S. M. C., & Lopes, J. P. (2019) · Journal of Promotion Management · doi:10.1080/10496491.2019.1557819 · Cited by 64
“…being a relatively recent concept in the scholarly literature, authors have come with multiple scales to measure the same concept, thus complicate the generalization of one scale that captures all of the consumers’ engagement-related dynamics (Hollebeek et al., 2014; Mollen & Wilson, 2010).”
BackgroundInfluentialBuilding Customer-Brand Relationships through Customer Brand Engagement
Kumar, V. (2020) · Journal of Promotion Management · doi:10.1080/10496491.2020.1746466 · Cited by 67
Ahmad, N., Ahmad, A., & Siddique, I. (2023) · Administrative Sciences · doi:10.3390/admsci13040105 · Cited by 64
Rather, R. A., Rasul, T., Khan, H., & Khan, I. M. (2023) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2023.103572 · Cited by 80
“The final perspective conceptualizes CBE as “a consumer’s positively-valenced brand-related cognitive, emotional, and behavioral activity during or related to brand interaction” (Hollebeek et al., 2014, p. 154).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialManaging customer engagement at trade shows
Gopalakrishna, S., Malthouse, E. C., & Lawrence, J. M. (2017) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.11.015 · Cited by 69
Rodríguez‐Ardura, I., & Meseguer‐Artola, A. (2018) · Information Technology and People · doi:10.1108/itp-10-2017-0358 · Cited by 60
“In the focal context of m-Facebook interaction, engagement might facilitate the m-Facebooker thinking about the brand’s or organisation’s value proposition, perceiving it as relevant, or embracing a positive and active bond with the brand (Hollebeek et al., 2014; Potdar et al., 2018).”
BackgroundKhan, Z., Yang, Y., Shafi, M., & Yang, R. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11195167 · Cited by 59
“The previous research of SMMAs in the context of different brands marketing was mostly exploratory, where the empirical study did little to address all the challenges of the current marketing trends [11,20].”
BackgroundThe power of brand passion in sports apparel brands
Pourazad, N., Stocchi, L., & Pare, V. (2019) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-12-2018-2164 · Cited by 62
Consumer engagement in social media: scale comparison analysis
Ferreira, M., Zambaldi, F., & Guerra, D. D. S. (2020) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-10-2018-2095 · Cited by 48
Consumer brand engagement: Refined measurement scales for product and service contexts
Ndhlovu, T., & Maree, T. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.064 · Cited by 65
Luangrath, A. W., Xu, Y., & Wang, T. (2022) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/00222437221116058 · Cited by 62
“Consumer engagement, broadly de fi ned as action taken by a consumer to interact with content on social media, is of great concern to marketers (Brodie et al. 2013; Calder, Malthouse, and Maslowska 2016; Hollebeek, Glynn, and Brodie 2014).”
BackgroundUnderstanding consumer motivations in online social brand engagement participation
Osei-Frimpong, K. (2019) · International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management · doi:10.1108/ijrdm-08-2018-0151 · Cited by 65
Solís-Radilla, M. M., Hernández-Lobato, L., Callarisa-Fiol, L. J., & Durán, H. T. P. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11154132 · Cited by 76
Baker, J. J., Kearney, T., Laud, G., & Holmlund, M. (2021) · Journal of service management · doi:10.1108/josm-08-2020-0300 · Cited by 46
Videogames-as-a-service: converting freemium- to paying-users through pop-up advertisement value
Hussain, A., Abbasi, A. Z., Hollebeek, L. D., Schultz, C. D., Ting, D. H., & Wilson, B. J. (2021) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-05-2020-0164 · Cited by 61
Self-citationČapienė, A., Rūtelionė, A., & Krukowski, K. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su141610290 · Cited by 70
“Another dimension of enthused participation emphasizes how invested the individual is in this process and how passionate they are about sustainable consumption behavior [80].”
BackgroundMeyer‐Waarden, L., Bruwer, J., & Galan, J.-P. (2022) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103212 · Cited by 73
Raza, A., Farrukh, M. H. M., Wang, G., Iqbal, M. K., & Farhan, M. (2023) · Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management · doi:10.1080/19368623.2023.2223571 · Cited by 62
“Affective engagement gauges customers’ positive brand/firm-related emotions, behavioral engagement measures their commitment to a brand or company, and cognitive engagement assesses their firm/brand-related thought-building and immersion (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundImpacts of user-generated images in online reviews on customer engagement: A panel data analysis
Li, H., Liu, H., Shin, H. H., & Ji, H. (2023) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2023.104855 · Cited by 69
Consumer engagement on social media: insights from a virtual brand community
Lima, V., Irigaray, H. A. R., & Lourenço, C. E. (2018) · Qualitative Market Research An International Journal · doi:10.1108/qmr-02-2017-0059 · Cited by 66
The Relationship Between Gamification, Brand Engagement and Brand Equity
Xi, N., & Hamari, J. (2019) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.24251/hicss.2019.099 · Cited by 56
“Cognitive brand engagement refers to the degree of interest the person has or wishes to have in interacting with the focus of their engagement, named conscious attention [52], the duration of focus on [48] or the brand-related thought processing and elaboration in brand interaction [25].”
BackgroundJiménez‐Barreto, J., Sthapit, E., Rubio, N., & Campo, S. (2019) · Tourism Management Perspectives · doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2019.07.005 · Cited by 56
The impact of involvement on engagement with brand posts
Barreto, A. M., & Ramalho, D. (2019) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-01-2018-0013 · Cited by 61
Gamified package: Consumer insights into multidimensional brand engagement
Syrjälä, H., Kauppinen‐Räisänen, H., Luomala, H., Joelsson, T. N., Könnölä, K., & Mäkilä, T. (2019) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.089 · Cited by 56
Transformative value and the role of involvement in gamification and serious games for well-being
Mulcahy, R., Zainuddin, N., & Russell-Bennett, R. (2020) · Journal of Service Management · doi:10.1108/josm-05-2019-0137 · Cited by 46
Exploring consumer–brand engagement: a holistic framework
Cheung, M. L., Pires, G. D., & Rosenberger, P. J. (2020) · European Business Review · doi:10.1108/ebr-10-2019-0256 · Cited by 61
Developing brand advocacy through brand activities on Facebook
Choi, Y., Kroff, M. W., & Kim, J. (2021) · Journal of Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1108/jcm-10-2019-3460 · Cited by 55
Farzin, M., Sadeghi, M., Fattahi, M., & Eghbal, M. R. (2021) · Business Perspectives and Research · doi:10.1177/22785337211024926 · Cited by 75
“Studies that examine social media marketing effects from the perspective of branding are mainly exploratory and less empirically studied (Godey et al., 2016; Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundSrivastava, M., & Sivaramakrishnan, S. (2022) · International Marketing Review · doi:10.1108/imr-06-2021-0204 · Cited by 50
Al-Haddad, S., Sharabati, A. A., Khasawneh, M. H. A., Maraqa, R., & Hashem, R. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14116771 · Cited by 84
“Therefore, consumer engagement can be viewed as a multidimensional concept encompassing cognitive, emotional, and/or behavioral dimensions that play a vital role in the development of long-term relationships that benefit businesses and their customers [49].”
BackgroundNadzri, W. N. M., Hashim, A. J. C. M., Majid, M., Jalil, N. A. A., Alzoubi, H. M., & Alshurideh, M. T. (2023) · Studies in computational intelligence · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-12382-5_124 · Cited by 60
Cillán, J. G., Izquierdo, C. C., & Cabezudo, R. S. J. (2017) · BRQ Business Research Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 · Cited by 55
Bazi, S., Hajli, A., Hajli, N., Shanmugam, M., & Lin, X. (2019) · Information Technology and People · doi:10.1108/itp-09-2018-0415 · Cited by 69
Brand personality in cultural tourism through social media
Peco-Torres, F., Peña, A. I. P., & Frías-Jamilena, D. M. (2020) · Tourism Review · doi:10.1108/tr-02-2019-0050 · Cited by 60
Thai, T. D.-H., & Wang, T. (2020) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106499 · Cited by 56
Machado, J. C., Martins, C., Ferreira, F. C., Silva, S. C. L. D. C. E., & Duarte, P. (2020) · International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship · doi:10.1108/ijsms-06-2019-0066 · Cited by 74
Paramita, W., Nhu, H. B. C., Ngo, L. V., Tran, Q. H. M., & Gregory, G. D. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102611 · Cited by 73
Effect of customer involvement on co-creation of services: A moderated mediation model
Cheung, M. F. Y., & To, W. M. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102660 · Cited by 53
Shen, Z. (2024) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-024-02698-y · Cited by 59
Self-presentation, privacy and electronic word-of-mouth in social media
Pasternak, O., Veloutsou, C. A., & Morgan‐Thomas, A. (2017) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-04-2016-1150 · Cited by 56
Exploring customer engagement valences in the social services
Naumann, K., Bowden, J., & Gabbott, M. (2017) · Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics · doi:10.1108/apjml-08-2016-0144 · Cited by 54
Lai, I. K. W., & Liu, Y. (2020) · Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · doi:10.4067/s0718-18762020000300102 · Cited by 54
Mohammad, J., Quoquab, F., Ramayah, T., & Alolayyan, M. N. (2020) · Cited by 55
Mingione, M., & Abratt, R. (2020) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2020.1750453 · Cited by 70
Jiang, H., & Luo, Y. (2020) · International Journal of Business Communication · doi:10.1177/2329488420960528 · Cited by 55
“In terms of engagement as experience (O’Brien, 2016), it may be defined as employees’ beliefs about how their social media experience fits within their organizations’ real CSR activities (Hollebeek et al., 2014).”
BackgroundHazzam, J. (2021) · Young Consumers Insight and Ideas for Responsible Marketers · doi:10.1108/yc-03-2021-1296 · Cited by 71
Zhou, M., & Yu, H. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14031621 · Cited by 66
“[35] developed a social media engagement scale, including cognitive processing, affection, and activation.”
BackgroundMele, E., Filieri, R., & Carlo, M. D. (2023) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113931 · Cited by 74
Exploring the role of augmented reality as a new brand advocate
Kumar, H., Tuli, N., Singh, R. K., Arya, V., & Srivastava, R. (2023) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.2227 · Cited by 58
Recalde, D., Jai, T.-M. C., & Jones, R. P. (2024) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103764 · Cited by 68
Wozniak, T., Stangl, B., Schegg, R., & Liebrich, A. (2017) · Information Technology & Tourism · doi:10.1007/s40558-017-0077-4 · Cited by 53
“Only recently, scholars have conceptualized customer engagement as a multidimensional psychological state that should be measured at an individual micro-level using a specifically developed scale instead of social media quantity metrics (Brodie et al. 2011; Hollebeek et al. 2014).”
BackgroundEngaging fashion consumers in social media: the case of luxury brands
Loureiro, S. M. C., Maximiano, M., & Panchapakesan, P. (2018) · International Journal of Fashion Design Technology and Education · doi:10.1080/17543266.2018.1431810 · Cited by 56
“This finding is acceptable because Hollebeek et al. (2014) had already”
BackgroundInfluentialEngagement in Healthcare Systems: Adopting Digital Tools for a Sustainable Approach
Presti, L. L., Testa, M., Marino, V., & Singer, P. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11010220 · Cited by 56
“behavioral component is defined as the time, energy, and effort that a consumer spends on the brand/organization during the consumer–brand interaction [51].”
BackgroundUnderstanding drivers of brand love - the role of personalized ads on social media
Tran, T. P., Muldrow, A. F., & Ho, K. N. B. (2020) · Journal of Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1108/jcm-07-2019-3304 · Cited by 55
Factors Driving Social Media Engagement on Instagram: Evidence from an Emerging Market
Wahid, R. M., & Gunarto, M. (2021) · Journal of Global Marketing · doi:10.1080/08911762.2021.1956665 · Cited by 65
“In traditional marketing, customer engagement is a psychological process involving affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses (Brodie et al., 2011; Hollebeek et al., 2014) in which customers convert into brand loyal (Bowden, 2009).”
BackgroundCustomer engagement in online service brand communities
Chi, M., Harrigan, P., & Xu, Y. (2021) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-09-2020-0392 · Cited by 55
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
