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
A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs
Churchill, G. A. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377901600110 · Cited by 16,549
Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship
boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x · Cited by 16,251
Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036 · Cited by 14,779
Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity
Keller, K. L. (1993) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1252054 · Cited by 14,763
The Scree Test For The Number Of Factors
Cattell, R. B. (1966) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10 · Cited by 13,554
Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800313 · Cited by 13,287
Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: myths and truths about mediation analysis
Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/651257 · Cited by 12,583
Multivariate data analysis : a global perspective
Hair, J. F. (2010) · Cited by 12,258
Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-007-0069-6 · Cited by 7,824
Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Research
Fournier, S. (1998) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209515 · Cited by 7,542
Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach
Steiger, J. H. (1990) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4 · Cited by 7,408
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2 · Cited by 6,691
Measuring the involvement construct
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/208520 · Cited by 6,013
Marketing in Hypermedia Computer-Mediated Environments: Conceptual Foundations
Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1996) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1251841 · Cited by 5,740
Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, Third Edition
Byrne, B. M. (2016) · doi:10.4324/9781315757421 · Cited by 4,653
Brodie, R. J., Hollebeek, L. D., Jurić, B., & Ilić, A. (2011) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670511411703 · Cited by 4,505
Self-citationBrand Experience: What is It? How is it Measured? Does it Affect Loyalty?
Brakus, J. J., Schmitt, B. H., & Zarantonello, L. (2009) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.73.3.052 · Cited by 4,415
Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (2012) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-011-0278-x · Cited by 3,735
Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: An exploratory analysis
Brodie, R. J., Ilić, A., Jurić, B., & Hollebeek, L. D. (2011) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.029 · Cited by 3,706
Self-citationConsumer Culture Theory (CCT): Twenty Years of Research
Arnould, E. J., & Thompson, C. J. (2005) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/426626 · Cited by 3,677
Aaker, D. A., Kumar, V., Day, G. S., & Luck, D. J. (1970) · Cited by 3,557
Customer engagement behavior: Theoretical foundations and research directions
van Doorn, J., Lemon, K. N., Mittal, V., Nass, S., Pick, D., Pirner, P., & Verhoef, P. C. (2010) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670510375599 · Cited by 3,536
Developing and validating a multidimensional consumer-based brand equity scale
Yoo, B., & Donthu, N. (2001) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/s0148-2963(99)00098-3 · Cited by 3,067
Critical service logic: making sense of value creation and co-creation
Grönroos, C., & Voima, P. (2012) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-012-0308-3 · Cited by 2,935
How Brand Community Practices Create Value
Schau, H. J., Muñiz, A. M., & Arnould, E. J. (2009) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.73.5.30 · Cited by 2,444
The Social Influence of Brand Community: Evidence from European Car Clubs
Algesheimer, R., Dholakia, U. M., & Herrmann, A. P. (2005) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.69.3.19.66363 · Cited by 2,414
Structural equations modeling: Fit Indices, sample size, and advanced topics
Iacobucci, D. (2010) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2009.09.003 · Cited by 2,263
Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude
Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.40.3.310.19238 · Cited by 2,151
Customer engagement: exploring customer relationships beyond purchase.
Vivek, S. D., Beatty, S. E., & Morgan, R. M. (2012) · Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice · doi:10.2753/mtp1069-6679200201 · Cited by 2,089
Representing and Testing Organizational Theories: A Holistic Construal
Bagozzi, R. P., & Phillips, L. W. (1982) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392322 · Cited by 2,064
Self‐Construal, Reference Groups, and Brand Meaning
Escalas, J. E., & Bettman, J. R. (2005) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/497549 · Cited by 2,048
The use of lisrel in validating marketing constructs
Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & van Trijp, H. C. M. (1991) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/0167-8116(91)90027-5 · Cited by 1,848
The Personal Involvement Inventory: Reduction, Revision, and Application to Advertising
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1994) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.1943.10673459 · Cited by 1,737
Demystifying customer brand engagement: Exploring the loyalty nexus
Hollebeek, L. D. (2010) · Journal of Marketing Management · doi:10.1080/0267257x.2010.500132 · Cited by 1,638
Self-citationGustafsson, A., Johnson, M. D., & Roos, I. (2005) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.210 · Cited by 1,576
Aaker, J. L., Fournier, S. M., & Brasel, S. A. (2004) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/383419 · Cited by 1,553
The Impact of New Media on Customer Relationships
Hennig‐Thurau, T., Malthouse, E. C., Friege, C., Gensler, S., Lobschat, L., Rangaswamy, A., & Skiera, B. (2010) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670510375460 · Cited by 1,523
Exploring customer brand engagement: definition and themes
Hollebeek, L. D. (2011) · Journal of Strategic Marketing · doi:10.1080/0965254x.2011.599493 · Cited by 1,519
Self-citationCollaborating to create: The Internet as a platform for customer engagement in product innovation
Sawhney, M., Verona, G., & Prandelli, E. (2005) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1002/dir.20046 · Cited by 1,406
Narrative Processing: Building Consumer Connections to Brands
Escalas, J. E. (2004) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_19 · Cited by 1,398
Undervalued or overvalued customers: Capturing total customer engagement value
Kumar, V., Aksoy, L., Donkers, B., Venkatesan, R., Wiesel, T., & Tillmanns, S. (2010) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670510375602 · Cited by 1,382
The Process of Customer Engagement: A Conceptual Framework
Bowden, J. L.-H. (2009) · Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice · doi:10.2753/mtp1069-6679170105 · Cited by 1,365
Mollen, A., & Wilson, H. (2009) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.05.014 · Cited by 1,338
Interaction Orientation and Firm Performance
Ramani, G., & Kumar, V. (2008) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.72.1.027 · Cited by 1,202
Brown, T. J. (2006) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1177/0092070305284969 · Cited by 1,043
An Experimental Study of the Relationship between Online Engagement and Advertising Effectiveness
Calder, B. J., Malthouse, E. C., & Schaedel, U. (2009) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2009.07.002 · Cited by 1,040
Customer Engagement as a New Perspective in Customer Management
Verhoef, P. C., Reinartz, W., & Krafft, M. (2010) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670510375461 · Cited by 1,037
A Review and Evaluation of Exploratory Factor Analysis Practices in Organizational Research
Conway, J. M., & Huffcutt, A. I. (2003) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428103251541 · Cited by 1,025
Lemke, F., Clark, M. K., & Wilson, H. (2010) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-010-0219-0 · Cited by 994
Adopting a service logic for marketing
Grönroos, C. (2006) · Marketing Theory · doi:10.1177/1470593106066794 · Cited by 975
Value from hedonic experience and engagement
Higgins, E. T. (2006) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.113.3.439 · Cited by 949
A framework for comparing customer satisfaction across individuals and product categories
Johnson, M. D., & Fornell, C. (1991) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/0167-4870(91)90016-m · Cited by 898
Sprott, D., Czellar, S., & Spangenberg, E. (2009) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.46.1.92 · Cited by 850
Mittal, V., Kumar, P., & Tsiros, M. (1999) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1251947 · Cited by 817
Mittal, V., Kumar, P., & Tsiros, M. (1999) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299906300206 · Cited by 785
Fournier, S. M., & Avery, J. (2011) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.001 · Cited by 717
Virtual communities: A marketing perspective
Valck, K. D., van Bruggen, G. H., & Wierenga, B. (2009) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2009.02.008 · Cited by 710
Interaction Orientation and Firm Performance
Ramani, G., & Kumar, V. (2008) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.72.1.27 · Cited by 699
Nambisan, S., & Baron, R. A. (2007) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1002/dir.20077 · Cited by 686
A comparative analysis of four scales of consumer involvement
Mittal, B. (1995) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.4220120708 · Cited by 649
How Regulatory Fit Affects Value in Consumer Choices and Opinions
Avnet, T., & Higgins, E. T. (2006) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.43.1.1 · Cited by 607
Fit Indexes, Lagrange Multipliers, Constraint Changes and Incomplete Data in Structural Models
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_3 · Cited by 512
Analytics for Customer Engagement
Bijmolt, T. H. A., Leeflang, P. S. H., Block, F. E., Eisenbeiß, M., Hardie, B. G. S., Lemmens, A., & Saffert, P. (2010) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670510375603 · Cited by 509
New Media Interactive Advertising vs. Traditional Advertising
Bezjian-Avery, A., Calder, B. J., & Iacobucci, D. (1998) · Journal of Advertising Research · doi:10.1080/00218499.1998.12466563 · Cited by 471
On the use of structural equation models for marketing modeling
Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Baumgartner, H. (2000) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/s0167-8116(00)00016-1 · Cited by 456
Brand Performances in Social Media
Singh, S., & Sonnenburg, S. (2012) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2012.04.001 · Cited by 453
Coulter, R. A., Price, L. L., & Feick, L. F. (2003) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/376809 · Cited by 421
Interactive Services: A Framework, Synthesis and Research Directions
Bolton, R. N., & Saxena-Iyer, S. (2009) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2008.11.002 · Cited by 416
Linking Service-Dominant Logic and Strategic Business Practice
Karpen, I. O., Bove, L. L., & Lukas, B. A. (2011) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670511425697 · Cited by 395
Narrative and Persuasion in Fashion Advertising
Phillips, B. J., & McQuarrie, E. F. (2010) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/653087 · Cited by 350
The Customer Engagement/Value Interface: An Exploratory Investigation
Hollebeek, L. D. (2012) · Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ) · doi:10.1016/j.ausmj.2012.08.006 · Cited by 303
Self-citationThe influence of personality on active and passive use of social networking sites
Pagani, M., Hofacker, C. F., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2011) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.20395 · Cited by 240
What Does Brand Mean? Historical-Analysis Method and Construct Definition
Stern, B. B. (2006) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1177/0092070305284991 · Cited by 225
Consumer retail satisfaction in rural areas: A reanalysis of survey data
Hildebrandt, L. (1987) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/0167-4870(87)90004-3 · Cited by 204
Longitudinal Data Analysis: Designs, Models and Methods
Bijleveld, C. C. J. H., & van der Kamp, L. J. T. (1999) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 199
Work and Fun on the Internet: The Effects of Utilitarianism and Hedonism Online
Scarpi, D. (2011) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2011.08.001 · Cited by 184
Emic and etic interpretations of engagement with a consumer-to-consumer online auction site
Abdul-Ghani, E., Hyde, K. F., & Marshall, R. (2010) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2010.10.009 · Cited by 154
Byrne, D. N. (2007) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00398.x · Cited by 148
Bolton, R. N. (2011) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670511414582 · Cited by 141
Toward a Deeper Understanding of Social Media
Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (2012) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2012.03.001 · Cited by 119
Rethinking Regulatory Engagement Theory
Pham, M. T., & Avnet, T. (2009) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2009.02.003 · Cited by 118
Factor Analysis and Measurement in Sociological Research: A Multi-Dimensional Perspective.
Sweetser, D. A., Jackson, D. J., & Borgatta, E. F. (1981) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2067243 · Cited by 112
Mining the Social Web: Analyzing Data from Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Other Social Media Sites
Russell, M. A. (2011) · Cited by 109
(2004) · Journal of Marketing · Cited by 107
Creating lift versus building the base: Current trends in marketing dynamics
Leeflang, P. S. H., Bijmolt, T. H. A., van Doorn, J., Hanssens, D. M., van Heerde, H. J., Verhoef, P. C., & Wieringa, J. E. (2009) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.06.006 · Cited by 81
Paving the way for “distinguished marketing”
Leeflang, P. (2011) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2011.02.004 · Cited by 80
Looking Back and Looking Forward with Interactive Marketing
Malthouse, E. C., & Hofacker, C. F. (2010) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2010.04.005 · Cited by 73
The Growing Influence of Online Marketing Communications
Shankar, V., & Batra, R. (2009) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2009.07.006 · Cited by 53
van Laer, T., de Ruyter, K., & Cox, D. (2012) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2012.09.002 · Cited by 49
Comment: The Perils of Focusing on Highly Engaged Customers
Libai, B. (2011) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670511414583 · Cited by 49
Response to Comments on “How Regulatory Fit Affects Value in Consumer Choices and Opinions”
Avnet, T., & Higgins, E. T. (2006) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.43.1.24 · Cited by 35
Social Media's Second Act: Toward Sustainable Brand Engagement
Briggs, T. (2010) · Design Management Review · doi:10.1111/j.1948-7169.2010.00050.x · Cited by 28
Interplay between Brand and Brand Community: Evidence from European Car ClubsPreprint
Algesheimer, R., Dholakia, U. M., & Hermann, A. (2004) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.534542 · Cited by 16
The Uninvited BrandPreprint
Fournier, S. M., & Avery, J. J. (2011) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1963056 · Cited by 11
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
Understanding customer experience throughout the customer journey
Lemon, K. N., & Verhoef, P. C. (2016) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jm.15.0420 · Cited by 5,765
Sokolova, K., & Kefi, H. (2020) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.01.011 · Cited by 1,650
The Role of Live Streaming in Building Consumer Trust and Engagement with Social Commerce Sellers
Wongkitrungrueng, A., & Assarut, N. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.08.032 · Cited by 1,477
Social media marketing efforts of luxury brands: Influence on brand equity and consumer behavior
Godey, B., Manthiou, A., Pederzoli, D., Rokka, J., Aiello, G., Donvito, R., & Singh, R. K. (2016) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.181 · Cited by 1,910
Consumer engagement in online brand communities: a social media perspective
Dessart, L., Veloutsou, C. A., & Morgan‐Thomas, A. (2015) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-06-2014-0635 · Cited by 1,516
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
