Effects of Traditional Advertising and Social Messages on Brand-Building Metrics and Customer Acquisition
Open accessAbstract
This study examines the relative effectiveness of traditional advertising, impressions generated through firm-to-consumer (F2C) messages on Facebook, and the volume and valence of consumer-to-consumer (C2C) messages on Twitter and web forums for brand-building and customer acquisition efforts. The authors apply vector autoregressive modeling to a unique data set from a European telecom firm. This modeling approach allows them to consider the interrelations among traditional advertising, F2C impressions, and volume and valence of C2C social messages. The results show that traditional advertising is most effective for both brand building and customer acquisition. Impressions generated through F2C social messages complement traditional advertising efforts. Thus, thoroughly orchestrating traditional advertising and a firm's social media activities may improve a firm's performance with respect to building the brand and encouraging customer acquisition. Moreover, firms can stimulate the volume and valence of C2C messages through traditional advertising that in turn influences brand building and acquisition. These findings can help managers leverage the different types of messages more adequately.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Post characteristics have been found to affect engagement.
“In line with this, post characteristics have been found to affect engagement (De Vries, Gensler, and Leeflang 2017; Sabate et al. 2014).”
From Influencer Marketing on Instagram: Empirical Research on Social Media Engagement with Sponsored Posts (2022) · cites this paper as De Vries, Gensler, and Leeflang 2017
The available passages from our copy are bibliographic material and keywords (labeled Abstract, no page number), not findings about post characteristics or engagement. Searches for those terms and for likes and comments found no passage addressing the claim, so this copy cannot verify it. (LLM, conf=0.70)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Babić Rosario, A., Sotgiu, F., De Valck, K., & Bijmolt, T. H. A. (2016) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmr.14.0380 · Cited by 1,073 · see citing works
Does Twitter matter? The impact of microblogging word of mouth on consumers’ adoption of new movies
Hennig-Thurau, T., Wiertz, C., & Feldhaus, F. (2015) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0388-3 · Cited by 434 · cited 2× · see citing works
“…Sethuraman, Tellis, and Briesch 2011; Srinivasan, Vanhuele, and Pauwels 2 / Journal of Marketing, September 2017 2010), C2C social messages (e.g., Hennig-Thurau, Wiertz, and Feldhaus 2015), and F2C social messages (e.g., Goh, Heng, and Lin 2013; Hutter et al. 2013; Kumar et al. 2016; Rishika et…”
BackgroundWiesel, T., Pauwels, K., & Arts, J. (2011) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.1100.0612 · Cited by 207 · cited 1× · see citing works
“To derive the standard errors of the estimates, we use Monte Carlo bootstrapping with 1,000 runs (e.g., Wiesel, Pauwels, and Arts 2011).”
MethodReceiver responses to rewarded referrals: the motive inferences framework
Verlegh, P. W. J., Ryu, G., Tuk, M. A., & Feick, L. (2013) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-013-0327-8 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hughes, C., Swaminathan, V., & Brooks, G. (2019) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/0022242919854374 · Cited by 789 · see citing works
How does consumer engagement evolve when brands post across multiple social media?
Unnava, V., & Aravindakshan, A. (2021) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-021-00785-z · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Gross, J., & von Wangenheim, F. (2022) · Journal of Interactive Advertising · doi:10.1080/15252019.2022.2123724 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
“In line with this, post characteristics have been found to affect engagement (De Vries, Gensler, and Leeflang 2017; Sabate et al. 2014).”
Result
- Authors
- de Vries, L., Gensler, S., & Leeflang, P. S. H.
- Affiliations
- Lisette de Vries, Store Support BV, Amsterdam
- University of Münster (DE)
- Aston University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Gensler, Sonja
- Leeflang, Peter S.H.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2017-09
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1-15
- ISSN
- 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7185
- OpenAlex
- W2618036913
- Cited by
- 260
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 60.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- Journal of Marketing (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Marketing and Social Media
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Marketing and Advertising Strategies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
- Keywords
- traditional advertising, social media marketing, brand building, customer acquisition, Facebook, Twitter, online forums, advertising effectiveness, telecommunications industry, message valence
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.
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