geistscience.com o… · Web viewgeistscience.com

Relationship of Predispositions of Social Media with Mediating Role of Brand Trust and Brand Loyalty: A Case Study on Students of University of the Punjab

Irsa Mehboob and Ch. Zia-ur-RehmanInstitute of Business Administration, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan

Purpose – This study is conducted to investigate the relationship between the social media

practices affecting the brand loyalty with the presence of brand trust as mediating variable.

Design/methodology/approach – Social media are web applications and platforms

for interactions, collaborations and content sharing The research focuses on influence of four

independent variables derived from literature including social networking, community

engagements, impression management and brand use on the dependent variable brand loyalty.

Brand trust plays a mediating role in converting these social media practices into brand loyalty.

A cross-sectional sample of 500 respondents was analyzed using techniques like Pearson correlation, Cronbach’s alpha, A.F Hayes Process. Although the sample was chosen using convenience sampling, it was well categorized into different age groups ranging from 18-26 years, varying qualification level from bachelors to PhD, income groups, professions, and other groups such as students and professionals, etc.Findings – The statistical analysis of the data reflects that with brand trust as a mediating

variable, all the independent variables have a significant impact on the dependent variable i.e.

brand loyalty. Research limitations/implications – Although this paper uncovers the determinants of the brand loyalty, brand loyalty to social media in a very systematic way, it does have certain limitations as per using the convenience sampling. Future research may try to overcome such shortcomings by specifically targeting buyers who have a greater influence from the social media.

University of the Punjab 1

Keywords: Social Media, Brand Trust, Brand Loyalty, Social Networking, Community

Engagements, Impression Management, Brand Use.


Introduction

Marketers are using social media practices for communication purposes which are internet based applications for creating and sharing of content. Some of them include blogs, social networking, electronic word of mouth, community engagements, and wikis and brand use practices. Apart from its useful function of interactions with consumers, its main benefit is the use of much less effort and cost to perform integrated marketing communications. According to (Ba, 2001)(Walden, 2000), the enhanced relationships between customers in a social media brand community increases brand trust, which positively effects brand loyalty, i.e., brand trust plays a mediating role in translating effects of brand community into brand loyalty. Building on these studies, social media practices influencing brand trust are consideration for the research. The study provides assistance to marketers and businesses to have more insight about these practices.

Background of the Study

Social media are web applications, platforms and channels which facilitate in the interactions, collaborations and content sharing (Richter A, 2007). Brand's reputation can be dramatically impacted by social media (Kim AJ, 2010). Social networking is an online service, platform, or website that facilitates the building of social networks or social relations among people who share homogeneous interests and activities. Social networking has many different platforms such as text messaging, photo sharing, wikis, blogs, and discussion forums (Harris R. , 2009); but, it is mostly referred to as some popular Internet based applications such as Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Whatsapp etc. A brand community is defined as a “community of admirers of a brand based on their social relations and is non-geographically bound and specialized community”(Muniz, 2001). Information sharing, strengthening culture of a brand, providing customer services, and positively influencing brand loyalty are some other advantages of a brand community (Muniz, 2001). Increasing brand loyalty, which is actually supposed to be the “Holy Grail” for businesses, is ultimately the most important benefit of brand communities for companies (McAlexander J. H., 2002). Community engagement practices reinforce members by intensifying their engagement with the brand community (J.H. Schau, 2009). Brand communities were introduced to build strategic relations with the customers by focusing on long term vantage despite focalizing individual transactions (Webster, 1992). Social media based brand communities offer a place to the customers to come on a single platform and discuss their point of view about brands. At present numerous companies are supporting their brand communities not only ethically but also financially to consider their workings for the improvements of its brand (Reppel, 2001). Communities are serving to create linkage between companies and customers (I. Kang, 2007). By impression management techniques, the customers spread good news, their experiences and quality related good words to the new ones. Social media based brand communities provide an online place to the searchers because here all kinds of words of mouth are shared which depict the product in every dimension (Dichter, 1966) (H. Gatignon,1986). These impressions help in presenting the products and winning the customers for brands according to the ego, desire and self-actualization (Goffman, 1959) (Baumeister, 1982)


(Rosenberg, 1979) (Hargie, 2011). Impression management in tactical sense helps in fulfilling the short term objectives of product acceptance (Melburg, 1984). Brand use practices are consumer’s activities of helping, facilitating and assisting the new comers by giving information relating to brand so that they could become familiar with the new brand. This activity of brand users can attract a huge amount of new customers toward the brand which is a tough job for business but the consumers can do it very easily by spreading their experiences and positive words-of-mouth about products (J.H. Schau, 2009). Brand use is basically an image of brand according to users of that brand which they hold while buying the products of that brand and while making comparison with other brands prevailing in the market(Faircloth, 2005) .Change in point of view of brand user and spread of negative or positive information directly impact brand loyalty. Brand trust can be defined as the willingness of the consumer to be satisfied by the ability of the brand to perform its stated function (Chaudhuri, 2001). In building strong consumer-brand relationships, trust is significantly essential (Fournier S. , 1998) (Urban, 2000), and brand loyalty is positively related to it. Development of e-commerce cannot reach its potential without trust (Sapient, 1999). Oliver(1997) defines brand loyalty as "a deeply held commitment to repurchase a preferred product/service consistently in the future, theory causing repetitive same-brand or same product-line purchasing, despite marketing efforts and situational influences having the potential to cause switching of a brand" (Chaudhuri, 2001). Brand researchers have an agreement that within the context of brand community, making customers loyal to the brand is actually one of the main significant factors of building and enhancing brand communities and consumer experience (McAlexander J. H., 1998) (McAlexander J. H., 2002) (Muniz, 2001) (J.H. Schau, 2009) (Schouten, 1998) (Zhou Z. J.-L., 2011). Hence, social media enables the customers to be loyal to the brands by acquiring information and developing trust relation with products and brands (Laroche, 2012).

Problem statement

The problem was to find out the relationship between the social media practices affecting the brand loyalty with the presence of brand trust as mediating variable

Significance of the Study

This study is useful for marketers and businesses because it provides insights about the social media practices being employed nowadays and suggest them to use these practices effectively to increase brand trust and brand loyalty. It contributes to the following areas:

a) Increasing awareness about the social media practices that can affect the trust in consumers towards the brand

b) Provide assistance to businesses and marketers to increase understanding of the importance of social media as part of the integrated marketing communication

c) Provide assistance to increase the understanding of what affects more the consumer’s trust towards the brand on the internet


d) Helps in understanding the mediating role of brand trust in the relationship between social media and brand loyalty

Research objective

The aim of this study is to look at the factors that will affect the brand trust and ultimately the brand loyalty of students

Research questions

Do social networking practices play a vital role in affecting brand trust? Do community engagement practices play a vital role in affecting brand trust? Do impression management practices play a vital role in affecting brand trust? Do brand use practices play a vital role in affecting brand trust? Do social networking practices play a vital role in affecting brand loyalty with brand trust

as mediating variable? Do community engagement practices play a vital role in affecting brand loyalty with

brand trust as mediating variable? Do impression management practices play a vital role in affecting brand loyalty with

brand trust as mediating variable? Do brand use practices play a vital role in affecting brand loyalty with brand trust as

mediating variable? Does brand trust play a vital role in affecting brand loyalty?

Literature Review

Social Media

Social media are web applications, platforms and channels which facilitate in the interactions, collaborations and content sharing (Richter A, 2007). They include blogs, social networking, electronic word of mouth, community engagements, and wikis and brand use practices. Because of their increased use, businesses and governmental organizations are also joining and using them for communication purposes. These entities are actively using this media for advertising and marketing. Although social media helps in interactions with consumers, it main benefit is the use of much less effort and cost to perform integrated marketing communications. Brand's reputation can be dramatically impacted by social media (Kim AJ, 2010). A study by (Worldwide, 2008) provides that companies are missing an opportunity to reach consumers by not engaging in social media as part of their online marketing strategy.

Social Networking

Social networking is an online service, platform, or website that facilitates the building of social networks or social relations among people who share homogeneous interests and activities, or are related to each other. In a social network, a user is represented by his/her profile, makes social links with other members and joins different communities or groups. Social networks are mostly


web-based and can be accessed over the Internet and communications occur in the form of instant messages or e-mails. Social networking sites allow users to share ideas, activities, events, and interests within their individual networks.

There are a number of purposes for the members to use social networks, the main motivation being communication and maintaining relationships. The most popular social networking activities include updating others on your current location and activities, sharing photos and invitations for events, getting updates on activities by friends, sending private messages, and posting public information.

Social networking has many different platforms such as text messaging, photo sharing, wikis, blogs, and discussion forums (Harris R. , 2009); but, it is mostly referred to as some popular Internet based applications such as Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Whatsapp etc. A brand community is defined as a “community of admirers of a brand based on their social relations and is non-geographically bound and specialized community” (Muniz, 2001). The purpose of these types of communities is the consumption of a good or a service. A brand community, like any other community is composed of some essential elements including its members, their relationships and the sharing of emotional or material resources. However, it is argued that the “creation and negotiation of meaning” is the most important thing being shared in a brand community (McAlexander J. H., 2002). Facilitation of information sharing, strengthening culture of a brand, providing customer services, and positively influencing brand loyalty are some other advantages of a brand community (O'Guinn, 2001).

Social media and brand community literatures argue that every individual has its own purpose to join. To feel socially connected, is one psychological need (Sarason, 1974); therefore, a need for belongingness is fulfilled by joining social media and connecting with people (Gangadharbhatla,2008) (Tardini, 2005). To engage in content generation activities in online environments is motivated by the desires to feel socially inter-related (Hennig-Thurau, 2004). Some other purposes of contributing in social media may be shopping, entertainment and making money ( (Zhou, 2011). Some researchers claimed that the lack of nearness and physical existence in social networking sites results in weak ties (Constant, 1996) (Granovetter, 1973), whereas, other researchers proved that these ties could encourage deep engagement levels in society and bring people together (Tardini, 2005) (Wellman, An electronic group is virtually a social network,1997). Another important reason for joining brand communities for people is to be associated with different brands or symbols that are desirable to them (Elliott, 1998) (Grayson, 2004)(Schembri, 2010).

Brand communities emphasize different values (J. H. Schau, 2009) and tend to allow information from various sources to be shared by the members (Szmigin, 2001). As for the brands or organizations, several opportunities were provided to remain in contact with highly loyal customers (Anderson, 2005), interacting closely with customers for creating value (J. H. Schau,


2009) and collecting customer related information for communicating effectively with each segment of market (Von Hippel, 2005).

Increasing brand loyalty, which is actually supposed to be the “Holy Grail” for businesses, is ultimately the most important benefit of brand communities for companies (McAlexander J. H.,2002).

Social media marketing help to build brand loyalty with effective use of time and resources by providing companies far better communication grounds with the consumers (Akhtar, 2011)(Jackson, 2011). Info-graphics conducted a study which suggests that at least half of Twitter and Facebook users say that after they began engaged with the companies on social media, they have become more likely to talk about, recommend or purchase a company's products (Jackson, 2011). Today, businesses are able to advertise products and services, provide customer support, and use all forms of social media such as social networking sites, communities, impression management, blogs, online gaming sites, news sites, forums and a lot more facilities on the web to create their brand communities to engage customers (D. Z. , 2010) (Kaplan M, 2009). In addition, consumers are able to share information with their friends and families about a product and service of a brand on social media (P, 2009) (W. G. Mangold, 2009). This sharing of information is actually contributing to brand awareness among different people which is cost effective way, which in turn boosts brand recognition and recall, and helps increase brand loyalty (Gunelius, 2011). Thus, networking, conversation, and community building are the sources of social media that helps firms to build brand loyalty (McKee, 2010).

Community Engagement Practices

Community engagement practices reinforce members by intensifying their engagement with the brand community(J.H. Schau, 2009) .In the current scenario, the attraction of people toward online technologies and world wide web has dynamically increased people like to spend more time on social media based brand communities to stay in touch with the changing trends. On these communities people share things of common interest and paper important cases relating to brand community (Davis, 2001) (Gackenbach, 1998) (Turkle, 1996) .Persons who find data pertinent to their interest over the net in the brand communities remain more in touch with these communities as compare to others (D. Shah, 2000) .Brand communities were introduced to build strategic relations with the customers by focusing on long term vantage despite focalizing individual transactions (Webster, 1992) .To share information with the customers one-to-one is a tough job and time consuming also. It is very hard for the companies to share updates, its history, values and culture to the consumers in this way. So, realizing the importance of this burning need a solvent was introduced in form of brand communities. Now the customers do not face any difficulty in all these perspective. They can easily access the information of any kind which they want to know (O'Guinn, 2001) .Social media based communities are initiated for providing a place to the lovers of that brand. The supporters of related brand join such communities to stay update with brand information. (O'Guinn, 2001) These communities are made up to interlink


different entities which have variety of stakes in companies and have association with brands. The core purpose of all of them is to create value in the minds of customers relating to products of its company (Schouten, 1998) (Sherry, 1998) .Number of scholars have studied the under lying concept of such communities in different dimensions but to some extent it above the understanding because the purpose of every customer is not same everyone has different aim to join such communities (Ward, 1996) (Holt, 1995) (O'Guinn, 2001) .Brands possess different attributes which exhibit the social class associate to that brand. (Wattanasuwan, 1998) It a research that consumers become a part of different communities with an outlook that their needs and inner desire will get an appropriate place to expose out what they want and what are their point of view about current products of this brand. What kind of improvements they want to match these products in accordance to their needs (Marinec, 2004). Social media based brand communities offer a place to the customers to come on a single platform and discuss their point of view about brands. It also provide huge amount of information to the interested ones. Now-a-days, numbers of companies are supporting their brand communities not only ethically but also financially to consider their workings for the improvements of its brand (Reppel, 2001) .Online communities not only provide an additional communication media but also convey precious information from customer side to the company (Anderson, 2005) .To maintain existing customers is easy than making new customers. The existing customers are well aware about the products of brand in use; they can give creative ideas and suggest different alterations in existing products to make them marketable(Hippel, 2005) .In the past the existing brand communities faced different obstacles relating for sharing of information to the users of that brand due to off line medium of information sharing. In the past, it was necessary for the consumers to be present physically in the communities which were drawback in customer meetings at a single forum. But now-a-days, the introduction of mobile phones, media and internet have eliminated all these hindrances, the consumers can meet online now in a single click. (Schouten, 1998) (Sherry,1998) (O'Guinn, 2001)

It is the world of socializing people. If you can socialize your product, you can make a blink in the mind of your customers. Social media is playing an important role in surrogating consumer’s attention toward the brand. Communities are serving to create linkage between companies and customers (I. Kang, 2007) .Social media based brand communities are very important to connect friends, families, relatives, parents, kids and different other people to share their emotions, rationale, information, experiences and attachment with these brands over brand communities (J.H. Schau, 2009) .These communities spread the bulk amount of information online by keeping in view the feelings of consciousness, traditions and rituals of that society and a sense of social responsibility (Michel Laroche, 2012) .Numerous viewpoints show that these social media based communities nurture individuals engagement (Michel Laroche, 2012).

Impression Management Practices

These are activities which help in creating friendly notions about brand from the users of that brand. These normally have outward and external focus for value creation. (J.H. Schau, 2009)


.By impression management techniques, the customers spread good news, their experiences and quality related good words to the new ones. Because the new customers feel hesitation while becoming a part of new brand and they search the existing users before using a new brand for getting know how about the product category of that brand. Social media based brand communities provide an online place to the searchers because here all kinds of words of mouth are shared which depict the product in every dimension (Dichter, 1966) (H. Gatignon, 1986). These activities are playing very important role in highlighting the uniqueness of brand in customer’s minds the searches show that their importance in the current era cannot be denied because it has replaced the physical media with online media, now everything is on the line. (R.Kozinets, 2010)

The process by which the people command to modify the images which others form about them is known as impression management (Kowalski, 1990) (P. Rosenfeldt, 1995) (Schlenker, 1998) (Riess, 19881). Goffman (1959) is known as a pioneer for introducing the term impression management he first time gave this concept to the world. He states that if you present something in specific impression, if your face expression matches to the product type then you can get the desire results from your target audience. What a presenter required is to control his/her impression while presentation. These impressions help in presenting the products and winning the customers for brands according to the ego, desire and self-actualization (Goffman, 1959) (Baumeister, 1982) (Rosenberg, 1979) (Hargie, 2011) .To meet with desired results the personnel used different techniques for impression management. Which are listed here: Exemplification, Intimidation, Self-promotion, Supplication and Ingratiation (Pittman, 1982).

Impression management in tactical sense helps in fulfilling the short term objectives of product acceptance (Melburg, 1984) .To impress the others ingratiation and self-promotion are two leading techniques which prove fruitful to bring customers toward the brand and obtaining desired results. Tactics like self-presentation and ingratiation are further subdivided into two categories including self-focuses and others focused (Liden, 1995) .To make yourself is an exemplary one in the eyes of on lookers, your face expressions, your eye contact, your body language, each and everything should be extraordinary one in every perspective this is called as self-focused. Self-focused is further categorized as exemplification and self-enhancement. In other sense if you are not exemplary then make others to feel positive about you. We can use for brands by replacing individuals by products first of all make your product so appeal that everyone who has any info and exposure relating to your product must get in touch with it. If your product is not in a position to place uniqueness in the minds of customers then make the customers to feel positive about your products. Types of other focused are as: opinion conformity, flatter and favor-doing (Jones, 1964) (Liden, 1995) .

Impression management is serving as an important player in online auctions. The sellers and buyers can meet over the line and discuss product, its attributes, design, color, price, discount, after sale services and other terms and conditions. Over the net the sellers and buyers can meet one to one, in this case the impressions of both plays an important role for making the


transaction. The buyer can go in “About Me” section of the seller available over internet account of the seller and get information about its life style and other things about which the buyer feels he/she need of any info. The buyers can easily ask different questions from the sellers during its availability over the internet at auction time a get rid of its ambiguities (J.D. Wells, 2011) .The online information reduces the risk of buyers they can buy without any uncertainty by having a look on the impressions of existing users of that brand. The new one feels free from risk due to availability of all the related information over the site and he/she can set a point of view by going through the conversation between company and its customers (P.A. Pavlou, 2007).

Brand Use Practices

Consumer’s activities of helping, facilitating and assisting the new comers by giving information relating to brand so that they could become familiar with the new brand. Customers also provide information to the people in their surroundings about the brand, its products which they are using and their experiences with this brand. This activity of brand users can attract a huge amount of new customers toward the brand which is a tough job for business but the consumers can do it very easily by spreading their experiences and positive words-of-mouth about products (J.H.Schau, 2009) .The importance of social media cannot be denied for keeping in touch the lovers of brands. They can share information to each other. Social media is an important pillar in the world of brand making. There are different social media based communities whose core purpose is to spread positive news about their brands and provide a platform to the users of that brands to meet to each other and discuss new market trends and requirements which they need for the using the commodities of this brand. The customers can spread information in a very easy way when there is collaboration in the members of the society. They feel no hesitation to share the culture, rites, thinking and different cultural events to other members of that society. While targeting any market, the companies should keep in view all such details relating to the societies because these norms play an essential role to advertise the brands. When there will be stronger the affiliation between members of the society the greater impact factor will be (Walther, 1996) (Wellman, 1999) .

These are variety of perceptions, behaviors, knowledge and beliefs which are procreated by the corporation about the brand in the minds of brand lovers with a view to generate positive outcomes (Keller, 2001) .Researches show that the beliefs and opinions created in the minds of the existing customers play an important role in convincing the new customers toward the brand and its products inspiring by quality of brand and attributes of products by means of existing customers (H.M. Lee, 2009) (L.E.Hem, 2007) .The individual’s words can create an impact in the minds of customers (L.E.Hem, 2007) .Brand use is basically an image of brand according to users of that brand which they hold while buying the products of that brand and while making comparison with other brands prevailing in the market (Faircloth, 2005). Change in point of view of brand user and spread of negative or positive information can directly affect the brand loyalty. The customers can withdraw their interest from the brand (H.M. Lee, 2009) .It is a responsibility of managers to do their best to enhance the brand image with the introduction of new strategies


to rise the worth of brand because if they do not do this, it will be an edge for the competitors to make a place in the market (Virvilaite, 2007) .Positive words of mouth by the customers are very important for product selection to the new customers. The companies need to work in this perspective to earn a major chunk of market. (Hou, 1996)

Brand trust

Brand trust can be defined as the willingness of the consumer to be satisfied by the ability of the brand to perform its stated function (Chaudhuri, 2001). It is stressed by (Doney, 1997) and (Moorman, 1992) that in situations of uncertainty, the only relevant notion is trust. Specifically, in an environment in which consumers feel at risk because they know that a trusted brand can be reliable, e-trust reduces the uncertainty (Chaudhuri, 2001).

There are two dimensions of brand trust. Reliability, the first dimension, involves the ability and readiness to keep promises and satisfy consumers' needs, and has a technical or competence-based nature. The second dimension is concerned when unexpected problems arise with the product; good intentions are attributed to the brand in relation to the consumers' interests. Therefore, a brand that always keeps its promise of providing value to consumers throughout the process of development, production, selling, servicing even in times of brand crisis; is considered trustworthy (Delgodo-Ballester, 2001) (Doney, 1997) (Ganesan, 1994) (Morgan, 1994).

In building strong consumer-brand relationships, trust is very essential (Fournier S. a., 1997)(Urban, 2000), and brand loyalty is positively related to it. The expectation of the performance of products a brand represents and the behavior of the organization, are the basis on which consumers develop trust in a brand (Ashley, 2009). In high-involvement, high-service product markets, trust is reflected by cumulative effects on loyalty over time (Chiu, 2010).

In highly competitive markets with increasing unpredictability and decreasing product differentiation, the development and maintenance of consumer brand trust on the Web is at the heart of companies’ marketing plans (Fournier S. a., 1997). Basically, the trust a consumer has in that specific brand is simply brand trust. With management of some aspects that go beyond consumer’s satisfaction in the form of brand trust with functional performance of the product and its attributes, brand value can be created and developed (Aaker, 1996) (Lasser, 1995). To conceptualize and measure a more qualitative dimension of brand value, the study of trust could offer an appropriate representation (Blackston, 1995) (Gurviez, 1996) (Heilbrunn, 1995).

Ambler (1997) Conceptualizes trust being one of the most important ingredients in the relationship between consumer and the brand where brand value is a function of the existing relationship between the consumer and the brand. Several factors essential to online transactions, including security and privacy are influenced by trust; therefore it is a crucial factor for the customers and the brand. Development of e-commerce cannot reach its potential without trust(Sapient, 1999).


The concept of brand trust has only become a common topic in consumer behavior literature in the 1990s, though brand trust has a long history of being the focus on management literature. Along with many interesting implications for practice and theory, its recent growth in use and popularity, the inherent uncertainty in the emerging electronic consumer environment brings the issue of brand trust to the forefront of marketing research.

Brand Loyalty

Oliver (1997) defines brand loyalty as "a deeply held commitment to repurchase a preferred product/service consistently in the future, theory causing repetitive same-brand or same product-line purchasing, despite marketing efforts and situational influences having the potential to cause switching of a brand" (Chaudhuri, 2001). The term loyalty has often been referred to; repeat purchase, commitment preference, and allegiance to be used interchangeably with its operational definition in marketing literature. Additionally, in a variety of market-related contexts, e.g., service, store and vendors, loyalty has been referred, and in customer and brand loyalty contexts that reflect the unit of measurement (Algesheimer, 2005).

In comparison to a customer whose purchase is caused by other reasons such as time limitations and information deficits, a satisfied customer tends to be more loyal to a brand/store over time. The Internet today influences the buying decisions to a great extent by allowing a customer to collect excess information about a product or service by saving time on the web, taking this phenomenon further to a next level. Thus, in comparison to achieving customer loyalty in the real world, where generally limited information is available, it is much more complex and harder to be achieved in the electronic world.

Brand researchers have an agreement that within the context of brand community, making customers loyal to the brand is actually one of the main significant factors of building and enhancing brand communities and consumer experience (McAlexander J. H., 1998)(McAlexander J. H., 2002) (Muniz, 2001) (J. H. Schau, 2009) (Schouten, 1998) (Zhou Z. J.-L.,2011). However, despite lack of other qualitative evidence, how the process of increasing brand loyalty in brand communities looks like is still not clear, but even (McAlexander J. H., 2002) argues that the cumulative effects of enhanced relationships in the customer centric model eventually result in customer loyalty. Trust is one of the main antecedents of loyalty according to the loyalty and trust literatures (Chaudhuri, 2001) (Chiu, 2010) (Harris L. C., 2004) (Hong,2011) (Kim, 2011) (Zhou, 2011). We argue that the enhanced relationships in the customer centric model of brand community increases brand trust, which positively effects brand loyalty, i.e., brand trust plays a mediating role in translating the effects of brand community into brand loyalty; taking into consideration that online communities have positive effects on trust and loyalty (Ba, 2001) (Walden, 2000).

Social media is a recent development of information technology that gives its users the freedom of self-expression and information sharing. In this way consumers can gain a lot of information about the brand over the internet than in real life experiences being offline. Information about


products or brands can also be easily accessed by customers. It provides customers the ease to approach brands and gain information about products. It also helps the customers to analyze for different alternatives and compare between them. The information acquired through these sources empowers them to compare products from various companies so that they are evaluated in terms of pricing, quality and other features. The customers are able to share information and experiences with others because of the interaction system in social media. Hence, social media enables the customers to be loyal to the brands by acquiring information and developing trust relation with products and brands (Laroche, 2012).

Relationship marketing plays an important role in the expansion of commerce and loyalty is a key requirement in establishing of such relations. Therefore, a number of researchers have studied and analyzed the factors affecting loyalty, such as service quality (Ruyter K., 1998)(Bloemer J., 1999), information quality (D. P. A., 2000), product quality (Oliver R, 1999), corporate image, price (Martin-‐Consuegra D., 2007) (S.P., 1991) (J., 1992) (Grewal, 2003), commitment (Evanschitzky, 2006) and price transparency (Soh, 2006). However, in analyzing loyalty’s relationship with online brand community, little research has been done. Conversely, the amount of research done in the area of brand community and loyalty suggests that the brand communities positively influence the loyalty (Jang, 2008).

Hypotheses

H1: A positive relationship exists between social networking practices and brand trust.

H2: A positive relationship exists between community engagement practices and brand trust.

H3: A positive relationship exists between impression management practices and brand trust.

H4: A positive relationship exists between brand use practices and brand trust.

H5: A positive relationship exists between brand trust and brand loyalty.

H6: A positive relationship exists between social networking practices and brand loyalty with brand trust as mediating variable?

H7: A positive relationship exists between community engagement practices and brand loyalty with brand trust as mediating variable?

H8: A positive relationship exists between impression management practices and brand loyalty with brand trust as mediating variable?

H9: A positive relationship exists between brand use practices and brand loyalty with brand trust as mediating variable?


Social Networking

Community Engagements

Impression Management

Brand Use

Brand Trust Brand Loyalty

Theoretical framework

This study explore the relationship between brand loyalty of students which is taken as a dependent variable and social networking, community engagements, impression management, brand use as independent variables with brand trust as a mediating variable.

Methodology

Research Design

Research Design of this study was developed by considering the cause and effect relationship between variables. Four independent variables (Social Networking, Impression Management, Brand Use and Community Engagement) and one dependent variable (Brand Loyalty) were observed with important role of one mediating variable (Brand Trust). In this cross-section study, applied research approach has been adopted. Sampling was done on the basis of age group ranging from 18-39 years and qualification ranging from undergraduate to PhD level. To generalize the results to entire population, respondents (university students) were chosen using convenience sampling from their respective departments. There are 72 departments in University of the Punjab but this study focused only on management and business related faculties. This research has been conducted on following departments:

Institute of Business Administration (IBA) Institute of Administrative Sciences (IAS) Institute of Communication Studies (ICS)


Institute of Business & Information Technology (IBIT) Institute of Agricultural Sciences (IAGS) Hailey College of Commerce (HCC) Hailey College of Banking & Finance (HCBF)

Data was collected using closed-ended survey questionnaire. Items

measured the different variables using Likert scale as desired by the

measurement involved and keeping in mind the time and limited resources

available to carry out the research. Before conducting the main survey, a

pilot study with 50 respondents was carried out. Cronbach’s alpha value of

0.893 was established, which is good questionnaire reliability (89.3%) for a

social sciences study. For final survey 580 respondents were survey out of

which 519 returned questionnaires in duly filled shape.

Results and Analysis

Analysis Procedure

Table 1

Age

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid

18-20 203 39.1 39.1 39.1

21-23 276 53.2 53.2 92.3

24-26 40 7.7 7.7 100.0

Total 519 100.0 100.0

Table 2

Gender

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid M 245 47.2 47.2 47.2


F 274 52.8 52.8 100.0

Total 519 100.0 100.0

Table 3

EducationFrequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid

Undergraduate 283 54.5 54.5 54.5Graduate 171 32.9 32.9 87.5Masters 50 9.6 9.6 97.1M. Phil 15 2.9 2.9 100.0

Total 519 100.0 100.0

It is interesting to note from the table that 283 students belonged to the group of students which are Undergraduate. Further the combined response of students in Undergraduate which is 54.5%. This interesting fact strengthens the importance that students realize the significance of research problem.

Pearson Correlation Table 4

CorrelationsSocialNetworking

CommunityEngagements

ImpressionManagement

BrandUse BrandTrust

BrandLoyalty

SocialNetworking

Pearson Correlation

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

N 519

CommunityEngagements

Pearson Correlation

.620** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 519 519

ImpressionManagement

Pearson Correlation

.629** .606** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000

N 519 519 519

BrandUse

Pearson Correlation

.613** .613** .673** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 519 519 519 519BrandTrust Pearson

Correlation.580** .576** .603** .665** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000


N 519 519 519 519 519

BrandLoyalty

Pearson Correlation

.442** .455** .510** .556** .634** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 519 519 519 519 519 519**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

In Table 6 the Pearson Correlation coefficient is .442; the significance level (sig) or p is .000 and the number of participants of both variables (Brand Loyalty and Social Networking) is 519. The correlation between (Brand Loyalty and Social Networking) is statistically significant because the “sig” is less than .05. Thus, we can reject the null hypothesis of no relationship and state that there is an association between (Brand Loyalty and Social Networking).The Pearson Correlation coefficient is .445; the significance level (sig) or p is .000 and the number of participants’ of both variables (Brand Loyalty and Community Engagement) is 519. The correlation between (Brand Loyalty and Community Engagement) is statistically significant because the “sig” is less than .05. Thus, we can reject the null hypothesis of no association and state that there is an association between (Brand Loyalty and Community Engagement). As the correlation is positive this means that higher the community engagement higher will be the brand loyalty and vice versa.The Pearson Correlation coefficient is .51; the significance level (sig) or p is .000 and the number of participants of both variables (Brand Loyalty and Impression Management) is 519. The correlation between (Brand Loyalty and Impression Management) is statistically significant because the “sig” is less than .05. Thus, we can reject the null hypothesis of no association and state that there is an association between (Brand Loyalty and Impression Management). As the correlation is positive this means that higher the Impression Management higher will be the Brand Loyalty and vice versa. In this case the correlation is .51.The Pearson Correlation coefficient is .556; the significance level (sig) or p is .000 and the number of participants of both variables (Brand Loyalty and Brand Use) is 519. The correlation between (Brand Loyalty and Brand Use) is statistically significant because the “sig” is less than .05. Thus, we can reject the null hypothesis of no association and state that there is an association between (Brand Loyalty and Brand Use). In non-technical language students who have more brand usage behavior will influence the brand loyalty more. As the correlation is positive this means that more the students are have brand usage the more the brand loyalty will be and vice versa. In this case the correlation is .556.


The Pearson Correlation coefficient is .634; the significance level (sig) or p is .000 and the number of participants of both variables (Brand Loyalty and Brand Trust) is 519. The correlation between (Brand Loyalty and Brand Trust) is statistically significant because the “sig” is less than .05. Thus, we can reject the null hypothesis of no association and state that there is an association between (Brand Loyalty and Brand Trust). In non-technical language students who have more brand trust will influence the brand loyalty more. As the correlation is positive this means that more the students have brand trust the more the brand loyalty will be and vice versa. In this case the correlation is .634. Brand Trust is performing its role as mediating variable in this case.

Regression

We have used ‘Process by Andrew F. Hayes’ for regression of the model with mediating variable. Brand Loyalty is taken as response, outcome or dependent variable, Brand Trust is taken as moderating variable; Social Networking, Community Engagements, Impression Management and Brand Use are used as explanatory, predictor or independent variables.For the purpose of this test, we have denoted the variables as follows:Social Networking as SN, Community Engagements as CE, Impression Management as IM, Brand Use as BU, Brand Trust as BT, Brand Loyalty as BL.

Run MATRIX procedure:

**************** PROCESS Procedure for SPSS Release 2.13.1 **************

Written by Andrew F. Hayes, Ph.D. www.afhayes.com Documentation available in Hayes (2013). www.guilford.com/p/hayes3

**************************************************************************Model = 4 Y = BL X = SN M = BT


Statistical Controls:CONTROL= CE IM BU

Sample size 519

**************************************************************************Outcome: BT

Model Summary R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p .7221 .5215 .2331 140.0229 4.0000 514.0000 .0000

Model coeff se t p LLCI ULCIconstant .7763 .1259 6.1642 .0000 .5289 1.0237SN .1542 .0428 3.6065 .0003 .0702 .2383CE .1539 .0422 3.6422 .0003 .0709 .2368IM .1550 .0422 3.6719 .0003 .0721 .2379BU .3236 .0407 7.9558 .0000 .2437 .4035

**************************************************************************Outcome: BL


Model


coeff se t p LLCI ULCIconstant .5000 .1621 3.0851 .0021 .1816 .8183BT .4997 .0548 9.1242 .0000 .3921 .6074SN -.0144 .0538 -.2686 .7883 -.1201 .0912CE .0389 .0531 .7313 .4649 -.0655 .1432IM .1249 .0531 2.3523 .0190 .0206 .2293BU .1812 .0535 3.3857 .0008 .0761 .2864

************************** TOTAL EFFECT MODEL ****************************Outcome: BL


Model coeff se t p LLCI ULCIconstant .8879 .1684 5.2718 .0000 .5570 1.2188SN .0626 .0572 1.0951 .2740 -.0497 .1750CE .1157 .0565 2.0486 .0410 .0047 .2267IM .2024 .0565 3.5846 .0004 .0915 .3133BU .3430 .0544 6.3042 .0000 .2361 .4498

***************** TOTAL, DIRECT, AND INDIRECT EFFECTS ********************


Total effect of X on Y Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI .0626 .0572 1.0951 .2740 -.0497 .1750

Direct effect of X on Y Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI -.0144 .0538 -.2686 .7883 -.1201 .0912

Indirect effect of X on Y Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIBT .0771 .0256 .0329 .1330

Partially standardized indirect effect of X on Y Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIBT .1194 .0390 .0486 .2029

Completely standardized indirect effect of X on Y Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIBT .0594 .0196 .0243 .1033

Ratio of indirect to total effect of X on Y Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIBT 1.2306 51.4857 .2930 103.0839

Ratio of indirect to direct effect of X on Y Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIBT -5.3365 49.9478 -542.5307 -1.5316

Normal theory tests for indirect effect Effect se Z p .0771 .0231 3.3367 .0008

******************** ANALYSIS NOTES AND WARNINGS *************************


Number of bootstrap samples for bias corrected bootstrap confidence intervals: 1000

WARNING: Bootstrap CI endpoints below not trustworthy. Decrease confidence or increase bootstraps -542.5307

Level of confidence for all confidence intervals in output: 95.00

------ END MATRIX -----

In Step 1 of the mediation model, the regression of brand loyalty with independent variables, ignoring the mediator, was not significant for social networking, b = 0.0626, t(514) = 1.09, p = 0.274, significant for community engagements, b = 0.1157, t(514) = 2.09, p = 0.041, significant for impression management, b = 0.2024, t(514) = 3.58, p = 0.0004, and also significant for brand use, b = 0.343, t(514) = 6.30, p = 0.0000.Step 2 showed that the regression of the independent variables on the mediator, brand trust, was also significant for all independent variables. For social networking, b = 0.1542, t(514) = 3.61, p = <.001, for community engagements, b = 0.1539, t(514) = 3.64, p = <.001, for impression management, b = 0.155, t(514) = 3.67, p = <.001, and for brand use, b = 0.3236, t(514) = 7.96, p = <0.001.Step 3 of the mediation process showed that the mediator (brand trust), controlling for brand loyalty with social networking, community engagements, impression management and brand use, was significant, b = 0.4997, t(513) = 9.12, p = .0000. Step 4 of the analyses revealed that, controlling for the mediator (brand trust), the independent variables were not a significant predictor of brand loyalty. For social networking, b = -0.014, t(513) = -0.2686, p =0.788, for community engagements, b = 0.0389, t(513) = 0.731, p = 0.465, for impression management, b = 0.125, t(513) = 2.35, p = 0.019, for brand use, b = 0.1812, t(513) = 3.386, p = 0.0008. A Sobel test was conducted and found full mediation in the model (z = 3.34, p = .0008). It was found that brand trust fully mediated the relationship between independent variables (social networking, community


engagements, impression management, and brand use) and dependent variable (brand loyalty).So, the regression equation for Step 1 is: Y=α+β1X1+β2X2+ β3X3+β4X4

Where Y= Brand LoyaltyX1= Social NetworkingX2= Community EngagementsX3= Impression ManagementX4= Brand Use Y = .8879 + .0626X1 + .1157X2 + .2024X3 + .3430X4

We see that Brand Loyalty is expected to increase by .0626 if social networking increases by 1. Brand Loyalty is expected to increase by .1157 if community engagement increases by 1. Brand Loyalty is expected to increase by .2024 if impression management increases by 1. Brand Loyalty is expected to increase by .3430 if brand use increases by 1. The standard errors of the regression coefficients are fairly small, indicating that coefficients are have been estimated fairly precisely.

And, the regression equation for Step 2 is:M=α+β1X1+β2X2+ β3X3+β4X4

Where M= Brand Trust

M=.7763 + 0.1542X1 + 0.1539X2 + 0.1550X3 + 0.3236X4

We see that Brand Trust is expected to increase by .1542 if social networking increases by 1. Brand Trust is expected to increase by .1539 if community engagement increases by 1. Brand Trust is expected to increase by .1550 if impression management increases by 1. Brand Trust is expected to increase by .3236 if brand use increases by 1. The standard errors of the regression coefficients are fairly small, indicating that coefficients are have been estimated fairly precisely.One Sample T-TestTable 5


One-Sample TestTest Value = 3

t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

SocialNetworking19.622 518 .000 .61143 .5502 .6726

CommunityEngagements18.591 518 .000 .57726 .5163 .6383

ImpressionManagement18.647 518 .000 .61349 .5489 .6781

BrandUse20.884 518 .000 .70829 .6417 .7749

BrandTrust21.101 518 .000 .64393 .5840 .7039

BrandLoyalty15.144 518 .000 .53131 .4624 .6002

Table 7 shows the level at which different independent factors along with one mediating factor affecting Brand Loyalty of students studying in Punjab University. All of these independent variables of the current study were tested at test value of 3 in One-Sample Test.The results showed that:T- Value of social networking is 19.622 which is positively related to buying behavior with significant value of .000 which shows that considered social networking as a significant independent variable important for Brand Loyalty.T- Value of community engagement is 18.591 with significant value of .000 which shows that students have declared that community engagement is an essential ingredient necessary for brand loyalty. The students have clear perspective that brand loyalty could not be developed without the community engagement.T- Value of impression management is 18.647 with significant value of .000 which shows that students s strongly believe that impression management is one of key elements in influencing brand loyalty. Without such an attribute there is rare possibility of influencing brand loyalty. Therefore impression management becomes an essential factor responsible for brand loyalty.T- Value of brand use is 20.884 with significant value of .000 which shows that students strongly believe that brand use is one of key elements in influencing brand loyalty. Without such an attribute there is rare possibility of influencing brand loyalty. Therefore brand use becomes an essential factor responsible for brand loyalty.


T- Value of brand trust is 21.101 with P value of .000 which also shows that students support brand trust as mediating variable without which brand loyalty could not be possible.T- Value of brand loyalty is 15.144 with P value of .000 which shows that the respondents have agreed with the literature that brand loyalty is one of the most successful influencing factors.

Conclusion Discussion of the results

The research was undertaken to explore that what are important factors which have capability to affect brand loyalty in the students using social media at university level. Questionnaire was designed to get point of view of target audience about variables like social networking, impression management, community engagement, brand use, brand trust and brand loyalty. After getting raw data by questionnaire different statistical tools were applied to infer the results. The outcomes explained how social media play its role in influencing brand trust and brand loyalty. We used the regression analysis to show the relationship of the social media practices influencing brand loyalty and the mediating role played by brand trust in this respect.

The model proved the hypothesis that social media practices enhance brand loyalty with brand trust as a mediator. According to the regression analysis, it’s been proved also that all the four independent variables contribute to brand trust which in turn enhances brand loyalty. These results are actually relevant as nowadays we could see different social media practices being undertaken by the customers or the end-users who contribute significantly to brand trust. Therefore, we utilized the previous researches of to build on this concept and to carry forward the research in this field of area and to a restricted domain of students by designing questionnaire to get the required results.

Managerial Implications

The study has a deep practical aspect in the corporate world as it let the mangers understand the prevailing trends of customers. The companies could get information about interest of customers in the product by analyzing the features of social channels. Little working on social media could generate bulk amount of positive outcomes for companies as customers spread positive words of mouth about the brands through social media by developing linkage between existing and new customers. The marketing managers and strategy makers of corporate sector could use the knowledge from this study to develop brand trust and brand loyalty in the customers. They need to focus on social networking tactics, engagement of customers in brand communities, management of word of mouth by the customer, their feedbacks and experiences of brand users to win the trust and loyalty of customers.

Limitations of the study and future research


The research was done on a constricted array of consumers belonging to a management and business domain of education sector. It is recommended that future research may account for a wide sample size for more accurate findings. The social media practices which were taken as independent variables in this study were not the only variables that affect brand trust and brand loyalty. Many more factors lie outside the model as well which were not accounted for due to time and other constrains. The study was carried out using quantitative techniques but some qualitative techniques such as interview methods could also used to further enhance the validity and reliability of the research.


References

Aaker, D. (1996). Measuring brand equity across products and markets. California, Management Review, 102-20.

Akhtar, S. (2011). Social Media and Brand Loyalty. Retrieved from http://www.socialtrakr.com/2011/07/12/social-media-and

Algesheimer, R. D. (2005). The Social Influence of Brand Community; Evidence From European Car Clubs. Journal of Marketing, 19-34.

Ambler, T. (1997). How much of brand equity is explained by trust. Management Decision, 283-92.

Anderson, P. (2005). Relationship marketing and brand involvement of professionals through web-enhanced brand communities: the of Coloplast . Industrial Marketing Management , 34(3), 285-297.

Ashley, C. A. (2009). Betrayed by The Buzz? Covert Content and Consumer-Brand Relationships. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 212-220.

Ba, S. (2001). Establishing online trust through a community responsibility system. Decision Support System, 323–336.

Baumeister, R. (1982). A self-presentational view of social phenomenon. Psychological Bulletin, 91(1), 3-26.

Blackston, M. (1995). The qualitative dimension of brand equity. Journal of Advertising Research, 2-7.

Bloemer J., D. R. (1999). Linking perceived service quality and service loyalty. European journal of marketing, 1082-1106.

Chaudhuri, A. a. (2001). The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty. Journal of Marketing, 81-93.

Chiou, J.-S. a.-C. (2006). The Effects of Satisfaction, Opportunism, and Asset Specificity On Consumers' Loyalty Intention Toward Internet Portal Sites. International Journal Service Industry Management, 7-22.

Chiu, C. M. (2010). Antecedents of online trust in online auctions. Electronic Commerce Research and Application, 148–159.

Constant, D. S. (1996). The kindness of strangers: The usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice. Organization Science, 119–135.

D. Shah, L. H. (2000). Expanding the virtuous circle of social capital: civic engagement, contentment and interpersonal trust. . Annual Meeting of Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication .

D., P. A. (2000). The impact of technology on the quality value loyalty chain. Journal of academy of marketing science, 168-174.


D., Z. (2010). The Social Media Marketing Book. C.A USA: O' Reilly Media Inc.

Davis, R. (2001). A cognitive-behavioral model of pathological internet use. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 2, 187-195.

Delgodo-Ballester, E. a.-A. (2001). Brand trust in the context of consumer loyalty. European Journal of Marketing, 1238-58.

Dichter, E. (1966). How word of mouth advertising works. Harvard Business Review , 16, 147-166.

Doney, M. a. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 35-51.

Elliott, R. &. (1998). Brands as symbolic resources for the construction of identity. International Journal of Advertising, 131–144.

Evanschitzky, I. P. (2006). The relative strength of affective commitment in securing loyalty in service relationships. Journal of business research, 1207-1213.

Faircloth, J. (2005). Factors influencing nonprofit resource provider support decisions: applying the bradn equity concept to nonprofits. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 13(3), 1-14.

Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 343-73.

Fournier, S. a. (1997). Reviving brand loyalty: a reconceptualization within the framework of consumerbrand relationships. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 451-72.

Gackenbach, J. (1998). Psychology and Internet: interpersonal, intrapersonal and transpersonal implications. San Diego: Academic Press.

Ganesan, S. (1994). Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of marketing, 1-19.

Gangadharbhatla, H. (2008). Facebook me: Collective self esteem, need to belong and Internet self efficacy as predictors of the I-generations attitudes toward social networking sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 5–15.

Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.

Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 1360–1380.

Grayson, K. &. (2004). Consumer perceptions of iconicity and indexicality and their influence on assessments of authentic market offerings. Journal of Consumer Research, 296–312.

Grewal, I. K. (2003). The internet and price value loyalty chain. journal of business research, 391-398.

Gunelius, S. (2011). 30 minute Social Media Marketing: Step by Step Techniques to Spread the Words about your Business. McGraw-Hill: USA.


Gurviez, P. (1996). The trust concept in the brand-consumers relationship. European Marketing Academy, Budapest, 559-74.

H. Gatignon, T. R. (1986). An exchange theory model of interpersonal communication . Advances in Consumer Research , 13, 534-538.

H.M. Lee, C. &. (2009). Brand Image strategy affects brand equity after M&A. European Jornal of Marketing , 45(7/8), 1091-1111.

Hargie, K. S. (2011). Double-bind accountability dilemmas: Impression management and accountability strategies used by senior banking executives. Journal of Language & Social Psychology , 30(3), 266-289.

Harris, L. C. (2004). The four levels of loyalty and the pivotal role of trust: A study of online service dynamics. Journal of Retailing, 139–158.

Harris, R. (2009). Social media ecosystem mapped as a wiring diagram.

Heilbrunn, B. (1995). My brand the hero? A semiotic analysis of the customer-brand relationship. European Marketing Academy, 451-71.

Hennig-Thurau, T. G. (2004). Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the Internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 38–52.

Hippel, E. V. (2005). Democratizing innovation . Boston: MA: MIT Press.

Holt, D. (1995). How consumers consume: A typopolgy of consumption practices. Journal of Consumer Research, 1-16.

Hong, I. B. (2011). The impact of consumer trust on attitudinal loyalty and purchase intentions in B2C e-marketplaces: Intermediary trust vs. seller trust. International Journal of Information Management, 469–479.

Hou, C. (n.d.). The Relationship Among Brand Awareness, brand image, perceived quality, brand trust, brand loyalty and brand equity of customer in China's antivirus software industry.

I. Kang, K. L. (2007). Investigation of online community voluntary behvaiour using cognitive map . Computers in Human Behavior , 23, 111-126.

J. H. Schau, M. M. (2009). How brand community practices create value . Journal of Marketing , 73(5), 30-51.

J., G. G. (1992). Brand Loyalty, entry and price competetion in pharmaceuticals after 1984 drug act. Journal of law and economics, 330-350.

J.D. Wells, J. V. (2011). What signal are you sending? How website quality influences perceptionof product quality and purchase intenstions. MIS Quarterly, 35(2) 373-396.

J.H. Schau, M. M. (2009). How brand community practices create value. Journal of Marketing, 73(5), 30-51.


J.H. Schau, M. M. (2009). How brand community practices create value. Journal of Marketing, 73(5), 30-51.

Jackson, N. (2011). Infographic: Using Social Media to Build Brand Loyalty. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/07/infographic-using-social-media-to-build-brand-loyalty/241701/

Jang, O. K. (2008). The influence of online brand community characteristics on community commitment and brand loyalty. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 57-80.

Jones, E. (1964). Ingratiation . New York : Appleton-Century Crofts.

Kaplan M, A. a. (2009). Users of the world unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 59-68.

Keller, K. (2001). Building customer based brand equity: A blueprint for creating strong brands. Doctrol Dissertation .

Kim AJ, K. E. (2010a). Impacts of luxury fashion brand's social media marketing on customer relationship and purchase intention. J Glob Fashion Mark, 1(3):164–71.

Kim, M. C. (2011). The effect of perceived trust on electronic commerce: Shopping online for tourism products and services in South Korea. Tourism Management, 256–265.

Kowalski, M. L. (1990). Impression Management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin , 107(1) 34-47.

L.E.Hem, N. I. (2007). Provenance associations as core values of place umbrella brands . European Journal of Marketing, 42(5/6), 603-626.

Laroche, H. &.-.‐O. (2012). To be or not to be in social media? How brand loyalty is affected by social media? International journal of information management, 76-82.

Lasser, W. M. (1995). Measuring consumer based brand equity. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 11-19.

Liden, S. W. (1995). Effects of impression management on performance ratings: A longitudinal study. Academy of Management Journal , 38(1), 232-260.

Marinec, K. G. (2004). Consumer pereception of iconicity and indexicality and their influence on assessments of authentic market offerings. Journal of Consumer Research , 31, 296-312.

Martin-‐Consuegra D., M. A. (2007). An integrated model of price, satisfaction and loyalty. Journal of product and brand management, 459-468.

McAlexander, J. H. (1998). Brand-fests: Servicescapes for the cultivation of brand equity. American Marketing Association, 377–402.

McAlexander, J. H. (2002). Building brand community. Journal of Marketing, 38–54.

McKee, S. (2010). Creative B2b Branding (No, Really): Building a Creative Brand in a Business World. Goodfellow Publishers.


Melburg, J. T. (1984). Impression Management and Influence in the Organization . Greenwich, CT, 31-58.

Michel Laroche, M. R.-O. (2012). The effects of social media based brand communities on brand community markers, value creation practices, brand trust and brand loyalty. Computers in Human Behavior , 1755-1767.

Moorman, C. Z. (1992). Relationships between providers and users of market research, the dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research, 314-28.

Morgan, R. a. (1994). The commitment trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 20-38.

Muniz, M. A. (2001). Brand community. Journal of Consumer Research, 412–432.

O'Guinn, M. M. (2001). Brand Community . Journal of Consumer Research , 412-432.

Oliver R. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty. Journal of Marketing, 22-44.

Oliver, R. &. (1997). Customer Delight: Foundations, Findings, and Managerial Insight. Journal of Retailing, 311-337.

P, S. (2009). To what extent has social media changed the relationship between brand and consumer. Dissertation of MA Advertising, Bucks New University.

P. Rosenfeldt, R. G. (1995). Impression Management in Organization: theory, measurement, practice . Routledge.

P.A. Pavlou, H. L. (2007). Understanding and mitigating uncertainty in online exchange relationships: A principal-agent perspective. MIS Quarterly , 31(1), 105-136.

Pittman, E. J. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation . Psychological Perspective on the Self , 231-263.

R. Kozinets, K. V. (2010). Networked narratives: Understanding word of mouth marketing in online communities. Journal of Marketing , 74, 71-89.

Reppel, I. S. (2001). Internet Community Bonding: the case of macnews.de. Europeoan Journal of Marketing , 38, 626-640.

Richter A, K. M. (2007). Social software — status quo und Zukunft. Technischer Bericht, Nr. Fakultät für Informatik. Universität der Bundeswehr München.

Riess, J. T. (19881). Indentities, the phenomenal self and laboratory research in Tedeschi (Ed.), Impression management theory and social psychological research . New York : Academic Press.

Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York : Basic Books.

Ruyter K., W. M. (1998). On the relationship between perceived dervice quality, service loyalty and switching costs. Internation journal of service industry management, 436-453.


S.P., K. L. (1991). An Emperical analysis of relationship between brand loyalty and consumer price elasticity. Marketing Science, 172-183.

Sapient, C. R. (1999). The eCommerce trust study. 1-33.

Sarason, S. B. (1974). The psychological sense of community: Prospects for the community psychology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Schembri, S. M. (2010). Brand consumption and narrative of the self. Psychology and Marketing, 623–637.

Schlenker, B. (1998). Impression Management: the self concept, cocial indentity and interpersonal relations. Brooks/Cole.

Schouten, J. M. (1998). Brand-fest: Service Scapes for the cultivation of brand equity. American Marketing Association , 377-402.

Sherry, J. (1998). Service Scapes: The concept of place in contemporary markets . American Marketing Association , 377-402.

Soh, M. &. (2006). Electronic marketplaces and price transparency: strategy, information technology and success. Management Information Systems, 3.

Szmigin, I. &. (2001). Internet community bonding: The case of macnews. European Journal of Marketing, 626–640.

Tardini, S. &. (2005). A semiotic approach to online communities: Belonging, Interest and identity in websites’ and video games’ communities. In Proceedings, IADIS international conference, pp. 371–378.

Turkle, S. (1996). Virtuality and its discontents: Searching for community in cyberspace. The American Prospect, 24(4), 50-70.

Urban, L. S. (2000). Placing trust at the center of your Internet Strategy. Sloan Management Review, 39-48.

Virvilaite, V. j. (2007). Brand Image Formation. ISSN 1392-2785 Engineering of Economics, Commerce of engineering decisions, 2(52), 78-90.

Von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation. Boston: MA: The MIT Press.

W. G. Mangold, D. (2009). Social Media: the new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Business Horizons, 357-365.

Walden, E. (2000). Some value propositions of online communities. Electronic Markets, 244–249.

Walther, J. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal and hyper-personal interaction. Communication Research , 23(1), 3-43.

Ward, N. G. (1996). Virtual Community: A Socio-Cognitive analysis . Advances in Cosumer Research, 161-166.


Wattanasuwan, R. E. (1998). Brands as symbolic resources for the construction of identity. International Journal of Advertising, 17, 131-144.

Webster, F. (1992). The changing role of marketing in the corporation . Journal of Marketing, 1-17.

Wellman, B. (1997). An electronic group is virtually a social network. In Culture of the Internet, 179–205.

Wellman, B. (1999). The network community: An introduction to networks in global village. Boulder, 1-48.

Worldwide, D. (2008). The impact of social media on purchasing behavior. Engaging Consumers Online.

Zhou, Z. J.-L. (2011b). Individual motivations and demographic differences in social virtual world uses: An exploratory investigation in Second Life. International Journal of Information Management, 261–271.

Zhou, Z. Z. (2011a). How do brand communities generate brand relationships? Intermediate mechanisms. Journal of Business Research.


Documents

geistscience.com o… · Web viewgeistscience.com