Master thesis, 30hp

Customer engagement

behavior on social media

brand communities A quantitative study regarding engagement

behavior, perceived benefits, and relationship

outcome on different social media platforms

Author: Sarah Sjöqvist

Supervisor: Mosad Zineldin

Examiner: Anders Pehrsson

Date: Spring, 2015

Subject: Marketing

Level: Advanced level

Course code: 5FE00E

i

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank professor Mosad Zineldin for guidance throughout the

writing process, the examiner professor Anders Pehrsson for important pointers during

the seminars.

The author would also like to express gratitude towards the company Wakakuu and

their brand manager for a good and important collaboration when distributing the

questionnaires. Without their spared time and help this study would not been possible to

implement.

Also a special thank you to fellow classmates and my family who has been providing

great support and guidance throughout the writing process.

Linnaeus University, Växjö

Spring 2015

__________________________________

Sarah Sjöqvist

ii

Abstract

Keywords: Customer engagement, relationship benefits, relationship outcome,

loyalty, trust, satisfaction, social media, brand communities,

Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest.

Background: Social media has provided both companies and customer with new

opportunities. Customers are increasingly integrating social media into

their daily lives and companies has noticed these new traditional

medias and started to take advantage of them through brand

communities. The new behavior occurring on brand communities is

what research call customer engagement behavior and goes beyond

transactional behavior. However, customer engagement has not been

fully researched on different social media platforms. The most

researched platform to date is Facebook. And with the rapid growth of

social media and the constant development of new platforms it is of

importance to understand customer engagement behavior on different

social media platforms to further being able to adapt to each unique

platform.

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the frequency of customer engagement

behavior and its affect on perceived relationship benefits and

ultimately, relationship outcomes. This based on three different social

media platforms where one company were present with brand

communities and then compare the outcome of each platform with

each other.

Hypothesis: 𝐻1 = The frequency of customer engagement behavior leads to

perceived relationship benefits of engaging in a brand community.

𝐻2 = Customer perceived relationship benefits have a positive effect

on relationship outcomes.

Methodology: Cross-sectional online questionnaires distributed on three different

social media platforms – Facebook, Instagram, and Pinterest.

Analysed using linear regressions.

Findings: The findings indicates that the frequency on which a customer engage

in engagement behaviors showed no statistical significance on

Facebook, however, the frequency of reading messages, visiting the

brand community, and purchasing products did show statistical

significance on Instagram. Furthermore, the perceived relationship

benefits that showed significance for both Facebook and Instagram

was practical and economic benefits. While on Facebook social

enhancement was considered an important indicator for relationship

outcome and entertainment benefits was considered important on

Instagram.

iii

Table of content

1. Introduction ______________________________________________________________________ 1 1.1 Background ____________________________________________________________________ 1 1.2 Problem discussion ______________________________________________________________ 1 1.3 Purpose _______________________________________________________________________ 3 1.4 Research questions ______________________________________________________________ 3 1.5 Delimitations __________________________________________________________________ 4 1.6 Report structure ________________________________________________________________ 4

2. Conceptual framework _____________________________________________________________ 5 2.1 Theories ______________________________________________________________________ 5

2.1.1 Brand communities on social media _____________________________________________ 5

2.1.2 Customer engagement ________________________________________________________ 7

2.1.3 Relationship benefits and outcomes of customer engagement on brand communities ______ 10

2.2 Model: concepts and relations ____________________________________________________ 12 2.3 Hypothesis ___________________________________________________________________ 12

3. Method _________________________________________________________________________ 15 3.1 Research design _______________________________________________________________ 15

3.1.1 Sample ___________________________________________________________________ 16

3.2 Questionnaire and measures ______________________________________________________ 17 3.3 Measures – operationalization ____________________________________________________ 18 3.4 Data collection ________________________________________________________________ 18 3.5 Quality criteria ________________________________________________________________ 19

3.5.1 Validity and reliability ______________________________________________________ 19

3.6 Data analysis __________________________________________________________________ 20

4. Analysis and results _______________________________________________________________ 22 4.1 Facebook _____________________________________________________________________ 22 4.2 Instagram ____________________________________________________________________ 26 4.3 Hypothesis ___________________________________________________________________ 30

5. Discussion _______________________________________________________________________ 32

6. Conclusions and implications _______________________________________________________ 36 6.1 Theoretical contributions ________________________________________________________ 36 6.2 Managerial implications _________________________________________________________ 37 6.3 Limitations and suggestions for further research ______________________________________ 38

References ________________________________________________________________________ 39

Appendices _________________________________________________________________________ I Appendix 1 Questionnaire, Facebook, Swedish version _____________________________________ I Appendix 2 Questionnaire, Facebook, English version ____________________________________ IV Appendix 3 Questionnaire, Instagram, Swedish version __________________________________ VII Appendix 4 Questionnaire, Instagram, English version ____________________________________ X Appendix 5 Questionnaire, Pinterest, Swedish version __________________________________ XIII Appendix 6 Questionnaire, Pinterest, English version ___________________________________ XVI Appendix 7 Correlation analysis, tables ______________________________________________ XIX

1

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

Since introduced, Internet has grown rapidly and generated new opportunities for

customers. Searching for information, communication with others, and expressing

feelings are now easier than ever through social media (Tsimonis & Dimitriadis, 2014).

The integration of Internet into customers’ everyday life is constantly increasing and the

phenomenon is often referred to as social media or Web 2.0. Arguably Web 2.0 is

transforming people’s individual and group behavior and this ultimately affect the

structure within the marketplace (Kietzmann et al., 2011). According to Constantinides

and Fountain (2008) the definition of Web 2.0 is (p. 232) “a collection of open-source,

interactive, and user-controlled online applications expanding the experiences,

knowledge and market power of the users as participants in business and social

processes.” Social media is highly interactive platforms, which employs both mobile

and web-based technologies where the users can share, co-create, and adjust user-

generated content (Kietzmann et al., 2011).

Furthermore, social media does not only provide customers with new opportunities but

for companies as well. These new media platforms are increasingly replacing traditional

media like TV, magazines, and radio, further, the buzz of social media and its marketing

opportunities seems limitless (Bruhn et al., 2012). Wirtz et al. (2013) note that there has

been an increase of online brand communities on social media during the last decade.

Brand communities are interactive pages where the company can share information,

spread the history and culture of the brand, and provide customers with assistance

(Laroche et al., 2012). These communities has emerged in order to facilitate relationship

marketing and maintaining long-term relations with its customers through social media

(Wirtz et al., 2012). Unlike traditional media, social media allows the individual to

become the content-creator, and customers engage with companies in terms of sharing,

liking, and posting within the individual’s own personal social network. The way

organization-related content is being distributed, created and used has thus changed

(Men & Tsai, 2014).

1.2 Problem discussion

As previously stated, brand communities on social media provide both customers and

companies’ with new ways to engage with each other. Companies’ wishes to engage

2

with loyal customers, learn from and about them, influence their community members’

perception of the brand, and spread information. Hence, customer engagement is

fundamental within brand communities (Gummerus et al., 2012).

Customer engagement has attracted the interest of consultants and managers within

different industries and companies worldwide. The interest has grown equally to the

growth of Internet and Web 2.0. It is the interactive nature of social media that has

increased the potential for companies to better serve and understands the needs of their

customers (Sashi, 2012). Moreover, research have conduced studies in order to better

understand, define, and build upon this phenomenon (e.g. Sashi, 2012; Gummerus et al.,

2012; Men & Tsai, 2014; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Bunker et al., 2013; Bowden et al.,

2014; Bitter et al., 2014; Kabadayi & Price, 2014). Sashi (2012) argue that companies

both within the private and public sector are striving to better connect with their

customers. They wish to develop a high level of customer engagement and hence,

establish an intimate and long-term relationship with its customers. By utilizing new

technologies like social media, companies will connect with both existing and potential

customers and understand them better. It has been argued that Internet is considered to

be essential in building customer engagement (Sashi, 2012).

Gummerus et al. (2012) argue that customer engagement can be looked upon as a

behavioral manifestation and this type of behavior is considered to be a consequence of

social media and the way people communicate with each other. Customer engagement

includes both customer-to-company interactions as well as customer-to-customer

interactions. Furthermore, this new behavior involves all communication through brand

communities and other social media and includes firm-related behavior that did not

exist before social media (e.g. customers writing positive or negative products reviews

online) (Gummerus et al., 2012). There are researchers who have investigated the notion

of customer engagement on social media (Sashi, 2012; Gummerus et al., 2012; Men &

Tsai, 2014; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Bunker et al., 2013; Bitter et al., 2014; Kabadayi &

Price, 2014). However, the majority of the studies focus on customer engagement

behavior on the social media platform Facebook (Gummerus et al., 2012; Men & Tsai,

2014, Bunker et al., 2013; Bitter et al., 2014; Kabadayi & Price, 2014). Social media is

evolving rapidly and new platforms are constantly emerging (Gummerus et al., 2012).

Several researchers argue that there is a gap within the existing literature focusing on

customer behavior and engagement within brand communities across different social

3

media platforms (Gummerus et al., 2012; Bitter et al., 2014; Men & Tsai, 2014;

Hollebeek et al., 2014; Sashi, 2012).

It is of interest to further investigate the differences in customer engagement between

Facebook brand communities and brand communities on other social media platforms.

Thus, examining if measurements used for measuring customer engagement on

Facebook is applicable on other platforms as well (Gummerus et al., 2012). Men and

Tsai (2014) further argue that it is important to explore other social networking sites

other than Facebook. They suggest platforms like Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn.

Conducting research on more platforms will contribute in getting a better understanding

of the effects of customer engagement on brand communities on social media. They also

emphasize on further studies regarding the growing number of mobile audience and

emerging mobile social media tools like Snapchat (Men & Tsai, 2014). Malthouse and

Calder (2011) also argue that customer engagement can only be comprehended through

customer experience and that these experiences are context-dependent. Hence,

investigating customer engagement behavior across different platforms is important in

order to further understand the phenomenon of engagement and is important for

companies who wishes to establish brand communities on different platforms.

1.3 Purpose

This study aims to investigate the frequency of customer engagement behavior and its

affect on perceived relationship benefits and ultimately, relationship outcomes. This

based on three different social media platforms where one company is present with

brand communities and then compare the outcome of each platform with each other.

1.4 Research questions

What affect does the frequency of engaging in engagement behaviors have on

perceived relationship benefits?

What affects does customer perceived relationship benefits have on relationship

outcomes?

4

1.5 Delimitations

This study aims at investigating customer engagement behavior on different social

media platforms, the study will be delimited to one company’s brand communities on

following social media platforms - Facebook1, Instagram

2, and Pinterest

3.

1.6 Report structure

This paper will be structured as follows. First, a literature review of previous research

within customer engagement on social media is presented. Second, the main concepts

will be presented within the theoretical chapter; customer engagement, Web 2.0, brand

communities on social media, relationship benefits of customer engagement on brand

communities, and relationship outcomes. Third, the methodological approach and

process will be explained. Fourth, the empirical findings will be analyzed using

mediation analysis in SPSS and then the results derived from the different social media

platforms will be compared. Last, the findings will be concluded with managerial and

theoretical implications, limitations and recommendations for further research.

1 Facebook – Social media platform where people can share and connect with friends and family

(Facebook, 2015) 2 Instagram – Social media platform focused on visual storytelling (Instagram, 2015)

3 Pinterest – Social media platform where you find ideas to your project, interests created by people like

yourself. You use visual bookmarks called pins when you find something you like on the web or

Pinterest. (Pinterest, 2015)

5

2. Conceptual framework

2.1 Theories

2.1.1 Brand communities on social media

Since the emergence of Web 2.0 researchers have been interested in this particular

phenomenon and how companies can take advantage of the new emerging opportunities

(Sashi, 2012). Social media provide companies with distinctive opportunities to foster

their relationship with its customers and at the same time attract new ones through

brand communities (Laroche et al., 2013). Social media channels are inexpensive and

user-friendly, attracting a large number of users and this makes it an interesting platform

for companies (Tsimonis & Dimitriadis, 2014). According to Nair (2011) social media

include platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to mention some of the most

well-known sites. Furthermore, Nair (2011) define social media as (p.45) “online tools

where content, opinions, perspectives, insights, and media can be shared. Some people

create content, while others lurk, observe, or disseminate content. As its core, social

media is about relationships and connection between people and organizations.” Social

media is allegedly new to the business world and there are a variety of different social

media platforms to consider for companies. However, even though blogs, podcasts,

widgets, wikis, video logs, and mashups are different expressions of social media,

serving different purposes, they all create experience on the Internet (Nair, 2011).

Hollebeek et al. (2014) state that research has highlighted the dynamics of focal

consumer – brand relationships, particularly the notion of consumer brand engagement

(CBS, this concept is previously referred to as customer engagement). Furthermore,

brand communities established on social media have showed to have positive effects on

customer relationships with the company and thus, have positive effect on brand trust,

and further brand loyalty (Laroche et al., 2013). Relationship building with customers is

embedded within both marketing concepts related to meeting customers’ need and the

marketing orientation concept, which emphasizes on meeting these needs by providing

superior value to the competitors. Moreover, the interactive nature of social media is

allegedly likely to distort the roles of the seller and customer by inviting customers to

take part in the value creation. Furthermore, customer engagement requires the

establishment of commitment and trust in a buyer-seller relationship (Sashi, 2012).

Accordingly, trust exists (Sashi, 2012 p. 259) “when one party has confidence in an

exchange partner’s reliability and integrity”. Nair (2011) argue that companies often fail

6

to recognize their presence on social media as more than just another media-outreach

program – they should handle it as a completely new platform. Social media has

changed the way we communicate with others and it is also important to recognize the

differences between different social media platforms (Nair, 2011).

Muniz and O’Guinn (2001) define brand communities as (p.412) “specialized non-

geographic bound community based on a structured set of social relationships among

admires of a brand. It is specialized because at its center is a branded good or service.

Like other communities, it is marked by shared consciousness, rituals and traditions,

and a sense of moral responsibility.” However, in order to understand a brand

community one must look at community as its own concept. Community is considered

to be a core construct within social thought and has been a large topic of interest for

researchers since the nineteenth century. Moreover, it is important to recognize that

communities are no longer limited by geography due to new communication

technologies (Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001).

Within a brand community the common and shared interest among the members are the

brand, those communities are premised on diversity and appears to be communities of

limited liability. There are relatively stable groupings within brand communities with

somewhat strong degrees of commitment. Members of a brand community feel

connection to the brand, but more importantly strong connection to other members

(Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001). Additionally, Benedikt and Werner (2012) argue that an

effect of membership prolongation leads to brand loyalty intentions and that customers

who were active within online communities of a brand had stronger brand commitment

than customers who were not member of the community. Brand communities have also

shown to be a successful tool in increasing sales and the main driver of this is the

sharing of information (Benedikt & Werner, 2012).

Social media management is strongly shaped by service-dominant logic and inherently

implies a customer and relation-oriented view. Thus, if the social media brand page

does not regularly deliver value for its members, the members will leave the page.

Benedikt and Werner (2012) argue that statistics for followers and likes might not be

affected but the customer engagement will decrease. Furthermore, it has been stated that

companies cannot themselves deliver value or experience on a brand page without the

assistance of the community members (Benedikt and Werner, 2012). Hence, customers

are part of the co-creation process within brand communities. Co-creation occurs when

7

customers participate in spontaneous behaviors such as helping other customers, make

suggestions regarding how the consumption experience can be improved and helping

service providers are all aspects of co-creation and hence, customer engagement

behaviors (van Doorn et al., 2010).

2.1.2 Customer engagement

According to Sahsi (2012) customer engagement is a topic that has had an emerging

interest during the last years. The increasing interest has paralleled with the

development of Internet and the new tools that has emerged with it – Web 2.0 (Sashi,

2012). There has also been a conceptual shift from product-centric organization to a

customer-centric organization and the management of customer relationships has thus

become a top priority among companies. Due to the increasingly networking society

customers can easily interact with other customers and this non-transactional customer

behavior has become more important for companies when developing their strategies

(Verhoef et al., 2010). Kabadayi and Price (2014), Bitter et al. (2014), Men and Tsai

(2014), Gummerus et al. (2012), Sashi (2012), Hollebeek et al. (2014), and van Doorn

et al. (2010) all emphasize on the importance of understanding customer engagement

within social media settings as well as recognizing the opportunities for companies to

extract value from their customers.

Hollebeek et al. (2014) highlight the outcomes of increased levels of customer brand

engagement and that it might lead to superior organizational performance results for

instance, growth in sales, brand referrals, reduction of costs, and collaborative product

development process between customers and company. Van Doorn (2010) additionally

states that it is important for companies to fully understand the impact of customer

brand engagement since the digital world constitutes of a broad audience with

immediacy breadth.

van Doorn et al. (2010) define customer engagement behavior as (p. 254) “behaviors

that go beyond transactions, and may be specifically defined as a customer’s behavioral

manifestations that have a brand or firm focus, beyond purchase, resulting from

motivational drivers.” Verhoef et al. (2010) however, argue that the transactional side of

the relationship is important for companies, but that ignoring non-transactional

behaviors may lead to lost opportunities (WOM and co-creation) for companies and

thus affecting cash flows. Therefore, overlooking customer engagement may lead to

customers being valued inadequately (Verhoef et al., 2010). Gummerus et al. (2012)

8

state that customer engagement is often used in order to express the highest form of

loyalty but that it contains all kinds of behaviors since it is a behavioral manifestations,

not only behaviors that characterize high degrees of loyalty. Similar to Sashi (2012),

Gummerus et al. (2012) also argue that social media provide customers with platforms

where they can co-create value with companies and engage in behaviors like

participating in online discussions, search for information, and commenting.

van Doorn et al. (2010) further argue that customer engagement also encompasses

customer co-creation and that this involves customer participation in the creation of the

core offering itself. Thus, co-creation occurs when customers participate in spontaneous

behaviors that customize the customer-to-brand experience. They further argue that

behavior as helping other customers, make suggestions regarding how consumption

experience could be improved and helping service providers are all aspects of co-

creation and hence, customer engagement behaviors (van Doorn et al., 2010).

Furthermore, van Doorn et al. (2010) argue that the general measurement of brand

engagement builds on the concepts of self-schema theory and attachment theory and

refer to Sprott et al. (2009) defining brand engagement as (p. 92) “an individual

difference representing consumers’ propensity to include important brands as part of

how they view themselves”. Moreover, Verhoef et al. (2010) notes that customer

engagement consists of multiple online-behaviors as blogging, customer ratings, word

of mouth et cetera. They further state that customer engagement is affected by firm

initiatives, customer characteristics, and environmental/contextual factors (Verhoef et

al., 2010).

Companies aspire to have relationships with its customers both with the goal of meeting

the customer’s needs and provide customers with superior value in relation to

competitors. Customer engagement requires establishment of trust and commitment in

the customer-company relationship and trust only exists (p. 259) “when one party has

confidence in an exchange partner’s ability and integrity” (Sashi, 2012). Furthermore,

van Doorn et al. (2010) argue that the most significant factor affecting customer

engagement is of attitudinal decedents. These include trust, customer satisfaction, brand

commitment, brand attachment, and brand performance perceptions, thus, high or low

levels of these factors can lead to engagement. Individual customer characters and

tendencies can also affect the level of customer engagement, these characteristics may

influence the customers decision making and cognitive process in a foreseeable way to

9

affect resulting behavior. Furthermore, customer resources (time, money and effort)

may also affect the level of customer engagement. It has been argued that customers are

most likely keen to evaluate cost and benefits of engaging in a certain behavior (van

Doorn et al., 2010).

Brodie et al. (2011) note five fundamental propositions in defining the conceptual

domain4 of customer engagement. The fundamental propositions derive from the

literature synthesis and used to further define customer engagement. The first

proposition include customer engagement as a reflection of a psychological state, which

occur when interactive customer experience with a pivotal agent (brand, product or

company) within a specific service relationship. Engaged customers may thus

experience confidence in a certain brand, they might even believe in the integrity and

pride of the brand and feel passion for it. Furthermore, engagement objectives might

include certain products or services, specific communication (e.g. advertisement), or

specific channels of communication (Brodie et al., 2011). Additionally, Men and Tsai

(2014) found that customers who are deeply engaged with the company’s Facebook

page tended to be more trusting of the company and feel more satisfied.

Second, Brodie et al. (2011) argue that customer engagement occur within dynamic,

interactive process of relationships that co-creates value. Furthermore, customer

engagement processes may vary between long- and short-term, with customer

engagement levels varying in complexity over time. The nature of customer engagement

process implies that interactions with a pivotal engagement object customer engagement

might recur at different levels, over time, and across interactions. Third, customer

engagement is a central role within nomological network of relationships. Hence

relational customer engagement originators include both participation and involvement

and consequences may include trust, commitment, self-brand associations, emotional

connections, and loyalty. Fourth, customer engagement is a multidimensional concept to

a context. Especially the importance of cognitive, behavioral, and emotional dimensions

of customer engagement may vary between the different settings in which customer

engagement is being observed. Fifth, customer engagement occurs within a specific set

of situations generating different levels of engagement. Customer engagement is

individual and context-dependent concept that can be observed at different levels of

intensity and complexity. Engagement states can range between non-engaged to highly

4 A “conceptual domain” defines the scope and delineation of a concept Brodie et al. (2010, p. 257)

10

engaged, and it is important to understand the contextual nature of engagement (Brodie

et al., 2011).

2.1.3 Relationship benefits and outcomes of customer engagement on brand

communities

Gwinner et al. (1998) note that in order to establish and maintain a relationship between

two parties, both must feel that they gain something from each other. Furthermore,

Gummerus et al. (2012) state that trust, satisfaction, commitment, and loyalty are

consequences of customer engagement (Gummerus et al., 2012). They further argue that

customers experience other relationship benefits other than becoming more loyal and

satisfied with a brand by engaging in brand communities. They proposed that by

engaging in different behaviors customers would receive different relationship benefits,

for instance entertainment. Customers engage in numerous behaviors that will

strengthen their relationship with a brand, this goes beyond traditional loyalty measures

like intended behaviors, frequency of visit, and purchasing behavior. The most common

online form in which customers engage with companies is social media and these

platforms are considered to be particularly suitable for developing customer relations

(Gummerus et al., 2012).

Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) notes that brand communities in social media share three

characteristics. Brand communities enable social presence in terms of physical, graphic,

and acoustic contact (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). The goal of any communication on

brand communities is to avoid uncertainty and reduce ambiguity. Brand communities on

social media are also closely related to the concept of self-presentation and individuals

desires to have control over the impression they give others. Moreover, self-disclosure

is considered to be an important part of relationship building and occur especially over

social media platforms like Facebook. Accordingly this is an indicator that customers

may gain social benefits from engaging in brand community behaviors (Gummerus et

al., 2012).

Moreover, Gummerus et al. (2012) focused on following relationship benefits in their

study (p. 860); practical benefits, social benefits, social enhancement, entertainment,

and economic benefits. Additionally, van Doorn et al. (2010) state that customer

engagement has consequences for all shareholders involving the customer,

brand/company as well as customers of competitors. The most basic level of

consequences of customers includes cognitive, attitudinal, and behavioral consequences.

11

Looking at the behavioral perspective, customers’ successful customer engagement

behavior will lead to more engaged customers and they will participate more in

customer engagement behavior actions. However, if unsuccessful this can cause

customers to change to different engagement strategies (Gummerus et al., 2012). Van

Doorn et al. (2010) further state that successful customers will actively contribute to

content at the community and thus influencing customer equity. (van Doorn et al., 2010)

Additionally, customer engagement is considered to relate to several brand relationship

outcomes, like trust, satisfaction, affective commitment, and loyalty (Gummerus et al.,

2012).

Customer satisfaction and loyalty emerge in several ways; Brodie et al. (2013)

discovered that the participants in their netnographic study conveyed loyalty towards a

brand and its community by expressing satisfaction and recommending the brand to

others. They additionally found that customers felt empowered by engaging in brand

communities in terms of themselves having influence over companies and other

customers. Customers also felt connected to the other community members and they felt

the need of help others within the community after receiving help themselves.

Additionally, the study identified trust and commitment as customer engagement

outcomes (Brodie et al., 2013). van Doorn et al. (2010) notes that customer engagement

behaviors are affected by context-based factors resulted from P.E.S.T.-aspects5 of

society. Competitors’ actions can also create strong contextual force in affecting

customer engagement (van Doorn et al., 2010). Brodie et al. (2013) also state that

customer engagement is a context-dependent physical state with different levels of

intensity. The customer engagement process is largely affected by customers’ needs of

information and is a highly interactive process in which customers interact with each

other and the company (Brodie et al., 2013). Thus, loyalty can be further strengthen by

engaging in a brand community and customer satisfaction also has a positively

influence by customers response of enjoyment, excitement, and pleasure of using the

community (Gummerus et al., 2012).

Customer engagement behaviors also has consequences for companies, both financial

and reputational consequences has been discovered within the field. Customer

engagement behaviors such as referral behavior, word-of-mouth and actions of

5 P.E.S.T. = Political/Legal, Economic/Environmental, Social, and Technological aspects (van Doorn,

2010, p. 258)

12

spreading and generating information (e.g. blogging) have showed to have an effect on

purchase behavior of existing and new customers. Furthermore, reputational

consequences emerge from engaged customers who will co-create value and participate

in brand communities. Highly engaged customers can be crucial when it comes to

sources of knowledge, they will help the company with activities ranging from

generating new ideas of design to development of new products (van Doorn et al.,

2010).

2.2 Model: concepts and relations

This study will look at following customer engagement behaviors - read messages, use

“like” option, write comments and purchase products (transactional behavior) and

further see how perceived benefits (practical benefits, social enhancement,

entertainment benefits and economic benefits) are affected by these behaviors. The next

step is to see how customers’ engagement behaviors and their perceived benefits affects

outcomes of loyalty, trust and satisfaction. This study also takes three control variables

into consideration, which type of social media platform the customer interacts with the

company, customer’s age and gender. Relations and hypothesis are presented in figure

1, conceptual model.

Figure 1. Conceptual model

2.3 Hypothesis

Due to an increasingly networking society where customers can interact with other

customers it is important for companies to look into this non-transactional customer

behavior (Verhoef et al., 2010). Customer engagement behavior is defined as (p. 254)

“behaviors that go beyond transactions, and may be specifically defined as a customer’s

behavioral manifestations that have a brand or firm focus, beyond purchase, resulting

from motivational drivers.” Furthermore, it has been argued that customer engagement

encompasses customer co-creation in terms of spontaneous behaviors that customize the

customer-to-brand experience (van Doorn et al., 2010). Brodie et al. (2011) note five

fundamental propositions when defining the customer engagement and they argue that

customer engagement reflects a psychological state that occurs when a customer interact

13

with a company. Engagement objectives could be certain products, communications, or

specific channels of communication. Moreover, reading messages, use “like” options

and writing comments can be seen as engagement behaviors (Brodie et al., 2011;

Gummerus et al., 2012). Gummerus et al. (2012) argued that customer engagement

extends beyond transactional behavior, however, they found that transactional behavior

(i.e. purchasing products) had positive impact on some of the perceived relationship

benefits (social benefits and entertainment). Thus, it can be argued that transactional

behavior is also part of customer engagement behavior (Gummerus et al., 2012). This

study proposes that the frequency on which a customer engage in an engagement

behavior leads to perceived relationship benefits.

𝐻1 = The frequency of customer engagement behavior leads to perceived relationship

benefits of engaging in a brand community.

𝐻1𝑎 = The frequency of reading messages on brand communities will lead to perceived

relationship benefits.

𝐻1𝑏 = The frequency of use the “like” option on brand communities will lead to

perceived relationship benefits.

𝐻1𝑐 = The frequency of writing comments on brand communities will lead to perceived

relationship benefits.

𝐻1𝑑 = The frequency of purchasing products will lead to perceived relationship benefits.

In order to establish and maintain relationships between two parties, both must feel that

they gain something from each other (Gwinner et al., 1998). Furthermore, it has been

argued that customers can perceive following benefits from engaging in a brand

community on social media; practical benefits, social enhancement, entertainment

benefits, and economical benefits. Brand communities are closely related to the concept

of self-presentation and it is an indicator that customers may gain social benefits from

engaging in community behaviors. Moreover, customers can seek social enhancement

deriving from the feeling of being useful and recognized within the community.

Practical benefits including informational benefits that include getting feedback and ask

questions. Entertainment benefits are related to customers having fun. Economic

benefits refer to customers feeling that they gain discounts, time savings, or take part in

competitions (Gummerus et al., 2012). Based on hypothesis 1 there is an expectation of

a positive relationship between customer engagement behaviors and perceived

relationship benefits. Brand communities on social media have showed to have positive

14

effects on customer relationships with the company and thus, have positive effects on

brand trust, and further brand loyalty (Laroche et al., 2013). It has also been stated that

satisfaction is a consequence of customer engagement (Gummerus et al., 2012). Hence,

this study proposes that loyalty, satisfaction, and trust are consequences of the perceived

benefits that customers experience on brand communities on social media.

𝐻2 = Customer perceived relationship benefits have a positive effect on relationship

outcomes.

𝐻2𝑎 = Practical benefits will have a positive effect on relationship outcomes.

𝐻2𝑏 = Social enhancement will have a positive effect on relationship outcomes.

𝐻2𝑐 = Entertainment benefits will have a positive effect on relationship outcomes.

𝐻2𝑑 = Economic benefits will have a positive effect on relationship outcomes.

15

3. Method

3.1 Research design

This study was based on deductive, quantitative research. Deductive research is applied

when data is created through theory, whilst its counterpart inductive research is when

theory is collected from data. Accordingly to deductive research, hypothesis has been

stated and they are based on what is already theoretically known within a certain area

(Bryman & Bell, 2011).

In order to test the theoretical model proposed in chapter 2.2 Model: concepts and

relations primary data was collected using cross-sectional online questionnaires

distributed through three different social media platforms – Facebook, Instagram, and

Pinterest. Customer engagement, perceived benefits, and relationship outcome where

measured using different sub-concepts based on theoretical frameworks illustrated in

table 1 below. The sub-concepts were based on previous studies within the field

conducted by Weman (2011) and Gummerus et al. (2011).

Table 1. Main- and Sub-Concepts

Main concept Sub-concepts

Customer engagement

Read messages

Use “like” option

Write comments

Purchase products

Perceived benefits

Practical benefits

Social enhancement

Entertainment benefits

Economic benefits

Relationship outcome

Loyalty

Trust

Satisfaction

Furthermore, Cross-sectional online sample questionnaires were chosen as the data

collection method in order to make inferences regarding the studied population at one

point in time. This type of study is typically used in order to sort out causal effects of

one (or more) independent variable(s) upon a dependent variable at a given point in time

(Bryman & Bell, 2011). Furthermore, previous research has used quantitative methods

and questionnaires as a tool for measuring customer engagement on social media

(Gummerus et al., 2012; Men & Tsai, 2014; Bitter et al., 2014; Kabadayi & Price, 2013;

Bunker et al., 2013; Weman, 2011).

16

In order to measure customer engagement on brand communities on different social

media platforms a company (Wakakuu6) was contacted which is active on Facebook,

Instagram, and Pinterest. Customer engagement in this study was measured using one

company and their customers on different platforms, this in order to avoid analyzing

customer engagement among different companies on different platforms and hence, get

misleading and non-comparable answers. The distribution of the questionnaires was

dependent upon collaboration with a company since the company needed to post links

to the questionnaires through their different platforms.

3.1.1 Sample

The population of the study was all of Wakakuu’s followers on each social media

platform. Thus, the whole population for Facebook was about 30 000 people, Instagram

11 000 people, and Pinterest 137 people7. Probability sampling was selected on random

basis, hence, each unit of the population had a chance of being selected (Bryman &

Bell, 2011). Furthermore, sampling occurs in three steps. (Yin, 2009) First the

population is defined, second the sampling frame should be identified, where the

sampling should take place and how to reach these people. In this study the sampling

occurred through the different social media platforms, the people that followed

Wakakuu and decided to answer the questionnaire was part of the sample. The third and

final step include determination of sample size, this choice should be guided based on

resource limitations such as time and money (Malhotra & Birks, 2003). In order to

decide upon a sample size one must decide how much error to allow. Hence, a

confidence interval should be determined. A confidence interval determines how high or

low than the population mean one’s sampling mean is prepared to fall. In this study a

confidence level of 90% was accepted with a margin of error of 5%. Thus, the sample

size for each platform was calculated and presented in table 2 below together with the

result of each platform (Bryman & Bell, 2011). However, due to the limited time-span

of a week that each questionnaire was distributed and the large amount of noise that

exists on the platforms the author accept a smaller outcome than the calculated sample

size.

6 Wakakuu is an online- and offline-store offering high-fashion clothes with high quality, founded 2011

in Sweden (Wakakuu, 2015). 7 The numbers of followers are as of 6

th of May 2015.

17

Table 2. Sample size and outcome

Platform Population Sample size Outcome % of sample

Facebook 30 000 269 167 62%

Instagram 11 000 265 437 165%

Pinterest 137 92 0 0%

3.2 Questionnaire and measures

The sample questionnaires were developed in two stages. First, relevant literature was

reviewed for existing scale items measuring customer engagement. Measures were

found and the author got access to a questionnaire used by Gummerus et al. (2012) and

Weman (2011) measuring customer engagement on a gaming brand community on

Facebook. The process of acquiring access to the questionnaire involved the author to

contact Johanna Gummerus and she further stated that their questionnaire based on a

previous questionnaire by Weman (2011). Weman (2011) in turn based his questions on

following authors - Dholakia et al. (2004), Gwinner et al. (1998), and Ouwersloot and

Odekerken-Schröder, (2008). The questionnaires in this study (see appendix 1-6) were

based on previous questionnaire used by Weman (2011) and Gummerus et al. (2011).

Furthermore, the variables measuring perceived benefits and relationship outcome was

considered interval and measured using a multi-item Likert measures on a five-point

scale ranging from ‘totally disagree’ (1) to ‘totally agree’ (5). The variables measuring

customer engagement behavior was considered ordinal. Ordinal variables are variables

whose categories can be ranked without an equal distance across the range. Hence, the

distance between visiting ‘daily’ and ‘once a week’ is not the same as the difference

between ‘once a week’ and ‘once a month’. However, one can see that visiting ‘daily’ is

more frequent than ‘once a week’ et cetera (Bryman & Bell, 2011). Further, the

variables measuring customer engagement behavior ranged from ‘daily’-‘more seldom

than once a month’, ‘often’-‘never’, and ‘daily’-‘I do not purchase products from

Wakakuu’. Interval variables are variables where the distance between the different

categories is identical across the range. The questionnaire also included two control

variables - age and gender. Furthermore, the questionnaires were distributed in Swedish

in order to facilitate the answering process for the respondents following the Swedish

brand Wakakuu.

18

3.3 Measures – operationalization

Table 3. Operationalization

Concept Definition of

concept

Type of scale

and its

construction

Sub-concept Items used

Customer

engagement

behavior

“Behaviors that go

beyond transactions,

and may be specifically

defined as a customer’s

behavioral

manifestations that has

a brand or firm focus,

beyond purchase,

resulting from

motivational drivers.”

(van Doorn et al.,

2010)

4-point scale where

at one end you have

daily/often and the

other never/less

than monthly.

Ordinal variables

Read messages Question 1-2

Use the “like”

option

Question 3

Write comments Question 4

Purchase products Question 5

Perceived

relationship

benefits

In order to establish

and maintain

relationships between

two parties, both must

feel that they gain

something from each

other (Gwinner et al.,

1998)

5-point Likert scale

where

(1) Strongly

disagree

(5) Strongly agree.

Scale variables

Practical benefits Question 6-8

Social enhancement Question 9

Entertainment

benefits

Question 10-11

Economic benefits Question 12-14

Outcome of

customer

engagement

on brand

communities

Engaging in brand

communities can

strengthen loyalty and

customer satisfaction

has also shown to have

a positive influence by

customers’ response of

enjoyment of using the

community

(Gummerus et al.,

2012). Trust is also

considered to be an

engagement outcome

(Brodie et al., 2013).

5-point Likert scale

where

(1) Strongly

disagree

(5) Strongly agree.

Scale variables

Loyalty Question 15-18; 21-

22

Trust Question 19-20

Satisfaction Question 23-25

3.4 Data collection

The data collection-phase involved two different stages. First, the author contacted the

company Wakakuu and explained that there was going to be three different

questionnaires, one for each platform. In order to retrieve as large number of

respondents possible the author and Wakakuu settled upon a raffle of a designer clutch

that would be given to one of the respondents. Second, the three questionnaires were

created using Google Drive and subsequently the links to the three questionnaires were

19

handed to Wakakuu who later posted the different links on respective platform along

with information regarding the raffle. The data collection process spanned between the

6th

to the 13th

of May 2015. The 12th

of May a reminder was posted on all social media

platforms informing Wakakuu’s followers that the 13th

is the last day to fill in the

questionnaire and hence, have a chance to win the clutch. Ultimately the questionnaires

generated 167 responses from Facebook, 440 responses from Instagram, and 0

responses from Pinterest. Due to the low response rate from Pinterest this social media

platform was not included in the analysis. After evaluating the Pinterest platform

response rate with the company the most likely answer was that Wakakuu was not as

active on Pinterest as they were on Facebook and Instagram, hence one possible

explanation to the low response rate.

3.5 Quality criteria

When evaluating business research, there are two essential criteria to look at – validity

and reliability. Validity refers to the degree in which a measurement instrument measure

what it is supposed to measure, and reliability refers to the stability of that

measurement. Though, a concept cannot be valid without being reliable, but can be

reliable without being valid (Bryman & Bell, 2011).

3.5.1 Validity and reliability

There are several ways in which to establish measurement validity, one way is to let

other people review the questionnaire. Since the questionnaire used in this study was

based on two previous studies the questions are considered to be valid and hence,

measure what they are supposed to measure due to previous research. Moreover, a

correlation analysis was conducted in order to ensure contract validity. Pearson’s

correlation coefficient was used and the result is presented in appendix 7. Furthermore,

the result showed that the concepts did not measure the same things and hence, are

considered valid (Bryman & Bell, 2011). The validity is further supported by theoretical

framework and previous research using the same parameters (Gummerus et al., 2012;

Weman, 2011). A concept cannot be valid without being reliable hence, the

questionnaires are considered reliable due to their validity (Bryman & Bell, 2011).

Furthermore, reliability was tested using Cronbach’s alpha for both dependent and

independent variables and the results were presented in table 4 below.

20

Table 4. Reliability test - Cronbach’s Alpha

Concept Cronbach’s Alpha

Facebook

Cronbach’s Alpha

Instagram

Customer engagement

behavior

0.610 0.566

Perceived relationship

benefits

0.728 0.782

Relationship outcome 0.823 0.837

The result of the reliability test indicated that all variables apart from Customer

engagement behavior on Instagram were within the accepted level of <0.60. However,

0.50 is an accepted level of Cronbach’s alpha, even if it is considered poor. It can thus

be concluded that the items within the questionnaires are reliable in that they were

derived from two previous studies and thus, considered valid (Bryman & Bell, 2011;

Hair et al., 2014).

3.6 Data analysis

First a factor analysis was conducted in order to define underlying structure among the

variables within the analysis. This type of analysis is used in order to determine whether

groups of indicators have a tendency to group together into clusters (factors). (Hair et

al., 2014) Furthermore, looking at the unrotated (for cases where only one component

were found) and the rotated factor analysis, question 17 and 24 were omitted from the

linear regression due to their non-coherence with the other variables, these two

questions were negatively worded as opposed to the others which was positively

worded. Hence, these two questions where not part of the subsequent linear regression

analysis.

In order to analyze the gathered data and test the hypothesis linear regressions where

carried out and summarized in four tables inspired by tables used in Devine (2010).

Linear regression analysis was chosen due to the fact that the study aimed to investigate

the relationships between customer engagement perceived benefits and perceived

benefits relationship outcomes and due to the classification of the variables. When

deciding upon an analysis method one should look at the measurement of the dependent

variable and in both cases the dependent variables (perceived benefits and relationship

outcomes) were classified as interval, hence, a linear regression was considered as

suitable analysis method (Bryman & Bell, 2011). Multiple linear regression measure if

there is a statistical linkage between a dependent variable (𝑌1 = perceived relationship

benefits; 𝑌2 = relationship outcomes) and two or more independent variables (𝑥1 = Read

21

messages, 𝑥2 = Use “like” option, 𝑥3 = Write comments, 𝑥4 = Purchase products; 𝑧1 =

Practical benefits, 𝑧2 = Social enhancement, 𝑧3 = Entertainment benefits, 𝑧4 =

Economic benefits). (Bryman & Bell, 2011; Hair et al., 2014) The formula for the two

linear regression analysis carried out in this study where constructed as follows.

𝑌1 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1𝑥1 + 𝛽2𝑥2 + 𝛽3𝑥3 + 𝛽4𝑥4

𝑌1 = Perceived relationship benefits

𝑥1 = Frequency of reading messages

𝑥2 = Frequency of using “like” option

𝑥3 = Frequency of writing comments

𝑥4 = Frequency of purchasing products

𝑌2 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1𝑧1 + 𝛽2𝑧2 + 𝛽3𝑧3 + 𝛽4𝑧4

𝑌2 = Relationship outcomes

𝑧1 = Practical benefits

𝑧2 = Social enhancement

𝑧3 = Entertainment benefits

𝑧4 = Economic benefits

22

4. Analysis and results

4.1 Facebook

Table 5. Hypothesis testing if customer engagement behavior on Facebook brand communities leads to

perceived benefits. Analysis method: Linear regression.

Model 1

Control Model 2

𝑥1

Model 3

𝑥2

Model 4

𝑥3

Model 5

𝑥4

Model 6

All

Constant 2.906 3.225 3.090 3.294 3.276 3.604

Control

variables

Age -0.206***

(0.043)

-0.204***

(0.043)

-0.214***

(0.043)

-0.202***

(0.043)

-0.205***

(0.043)

-0.204***

(0.043)

Customer

engagement

behavior

𝐻1𝑎 The

frequency of

reading

messages on

brand

communities

will lead to

perceived

relationship

benefits

-0.162**

(0.068)

-0.128*

(0.071)

𝐻1𝑏 The

frequency of

using the

“like” option

on brand

communities

will lead to

perceived

relationship

benefits

-0.081

(0.052)

-0.021

(0.057)

𝐻1𝑐 The

frequency of

writing

comments on

brand

communities

will lead to

perceived

relationship

benefits

-0.122**

(0.55)

-0.086

(0.061)

𝐻1𝑑 The

frequency of

purchasing

products will

lead to

perceived

relationship

benefits

-0.111

(0.080)

-0.039

(0.084)

𝑅2 0.121 0.151 0.134 0.146 0.131 0.169

Adjusted 𝑅2 0.115 0.140 0.123 0.136 0.120 0.143 Std. Error of

the Estimates 0.697 0.687 0.694 0.688 0.694 0.685

F-value 22.637*** 14.535*** 12.634*** 14.069*** 12.346*** 6.554*** Degree of

freedom (df)

Regression

1 2 2 2 2 5

Sig. *p<0.10, **p<0.05, ***p<0.001, N=167

S.E. (Standard Error) is present within parenthesis for each of the independent variables.

23

Table 5 shows the result from the linear regression between customer engagement

behavior and perceived benefits on the social media platform Facebook. Hypothesis

𝐻1𝑎- 𝐻1𝑑 was tested and the control variable of age showed to be significant when

measuring the relation between engagement behaviors and perceived benefits on a high

level of p<0.001. Hence, age has an impact on customer engagement behaviors effect

on perceived relationship benefits. Only 𝐻1𝑎 were shown to be significance, even

though the significance level was low (p<0.10). Hence, reading messages and visiting a

brand community on Facebook was the only predictor for perceived benefits (practical

benefits, social enhancement, entertainment benefits, and economic benefits). It can thus

be argued that use “like” options, writing comments, and purchasing products have no

significant impact on the perceived benefits of engaging in a brand community.

Furthermore, looking at the adjusted 𝑅2 for the overall model indicates that all of the

variables measuring customer engagement explain14.3% of perceived benefits. This is a

fairly small number and indicates that there are other measures of customer engagement

not present in the tested model that explains the relationship between customer

engagement and perceived relationship benefits. The F-value measure the statistical

significance of the regression equation as a whole and it has been argued that the ‘rule

of thumb’ measuring F-value is that all values above 4 is significant (Hair et al., 2014).

Looking at table 4 it is evident that all models are significant and hence, the regression

equations are highly significant on a p<0.001-level.

Moreover, looking at the changes in 𝑅2 in table 5 the changes for model 1 and 6 were

statistically significant, while the other changes did not show any significance

(however, model 4 and model 6 shows that hypothesis 𝐻1𝑐 is partially supported).

24

Table 6. Hypothesis testing if perceived relationship benefits on Facebook brand communities have a

positive effect on relationship outcomes. Analysis method: Linear regression.

Model 1

Control Model 2

𝑧1

Model 3

𝑧2

Model 4

𝑧3

Model 5

𝑧4

Model 6

All

Constant 4.253 3.300 3.735 3.911 3.340 2.566

Control

variables

Age -0.236***

(0.046)

-0.188***

(0.045)

-0.209***

(0.043)

-0.210***

(0.047)

-0.142***

(0.044)

-0.114***

(0.043)

Customer

engagement

behavior

𝐻2𝑎 Practical

benefits will

have a positive

effect on

relationship

outcomes

0.316***

(0.069)

0.198***

(0.069)

𝐻2𝑏 Social

enhancement

will have a

positive effect

on relationship

outcomes

0.246***

(0.046)

0.106**

(0.049)

𝐻2𝑐

Entertainment

benefits will

have a positive

effect on

relationship

outcomes

0.108**

(0.050)

0.016

(0.044)

𝐻2𝑑 Economic

benefits will

have a positive

effect on

relationship

outcomes

0.304***

(0.046)

0.245***

(0.047)

𝑅2 0.136 0.235 0.266 0.160 0.317 0.403

Adjusted 𝑅2 0.131 0.225 0.257 0.149 0.308 0.384 Std. Error of

the Estimates 0.746 0.704 0.689 0.738 0.665 0.628

F-value 26.039*** 25.144*** 29.768*** 15.583*** 37.989*** 21.694*** Degree of

freedom (df)

Regression

1 2 2 2 2 5

Sig. *p<0.10, **p<0.05, ***p<0.001, N=167

S.E. (Standard Error) is present within parenthesis for each of the independent variables.

Table 6 presents the results from the linear regression used to test hypotheses 𝐻2𝑎 - 𝐻2𝑑

on the social media platform Facebook. 𝐻2𝑎 predicts that practical benefits will have a

positive effect on relationship outcomes. The result was significant on a level of

p<0.001, which makes it highly significant. Hence, it can be argued that practical

benefits like getting information, providing other group members with information, and

share ideas with other group members have a positive effect on relationship outcomes

loyalty, trust, and satisfaction. 𝐻2𝑏 predicts that social enhancement will have a positive

effect on relationship outcomes and the result was significant on a p<0.05-level. It can

thus be argued that customers who value getting help from other community members

25

and thus, experience high levels of social enhancement are more likely to have higher

levels of loyalty, trust, and satisfaction. 𝐻2𝑐 suggests that entertainment benefits will

have a positive effect on relationship outcome, however, the result was not significant

(p>0.10). Consequently, it can be argued that feeling entertained on a brand community

on Facebook did not have any impact on relationship outcomes loyalty, trust, and

satisfaction. 𝐻2𝑑 suggests that economic benefits have positive effect on relationship

outcome. The result was highly significant on a p<0.001-level and it can thus be argued

that customers who felt like they benefited economically in terms of getting bonuses,

participating in lotteries, and acquiring better service where more likely to experience

higher levels of loyalty, trust, and satisfaction.

Looking at the adjusted 𝑅2 for the overall model it indicates that perceived benefits

explain 38.4% of relationship outcome. Furthermore, the control-variable ‘age’ showed

to be highly significant indicating that the age of the customers had an effect on how

benefits where perceived and in turn relationship outcome. Looking at Model 1 (table

6) the adjusted 𝑅2 indicates that 13.1% of relationship outcome can be explained by

control variable age. Looking at the F-values presented in table 2, all of the models are

considered significant on a p<0.001-level.

Furthermore, looking at the changes in 𝑅2 all models except model 𝐻2𝑐 were supported

(both the beta value of the separate model and model 6 were significant and hence,

supported). Hypothesis 𝐻2𝑐 were partially supported with a significance level of p<0.05

in the separate model.

26

4.2 Instagram

Table 7. Hypothesis testing if customer engagement behavior on Instagram brand communities leads to

perceived benefits. Analysis method: Linear regression.

Model 1

Control Model 2

𝑥1

Model 3

𝑥2

Model 4

𝑥3

Model 5

𝑥4

Model 6

All

Constant 2.653 2.941 2.827 2.987 3.389 3.631

Control

variables

Age -0.102**

(0.032)

-0.112***

(0.032)

-0.081**

(0.033)

-0.085**

(0.035)

-0.087**

(0.032)

-0.077**

(0.033)

Customer

engagement

behavior

𝐻1𝑎 The

frequency of

reading

messages on

brand

communities

will lead to

perceived

relationship

benefits

-0.204**

(0.066)

-0.132**

(0.067)

𝐻1𝑏 The

frequency of

using the

“like” option

on brand

communities

will lead to

perceived

relationship

benefits

-0.120**

(0.039)

-0.076*

(0.043)

𝐻1𝑐 The

frequency of

writing

comments on

brand

communities

will lead to

perceived

relationship

benefits

-0.120***

(0.035)

-0.047

(0.040)

𝐻1𝑑 The

frequency of

purchasing

products will

lead to

perceived

relationship

benefits

-0.238***

(0.056)

-0.179**

(0.059)

𝑅2 0.022 0.043 0.043 0.048 0.062 0.088

Adjusted 𝑅2 0.020 0.039 0.038 0.044 0.057 0.078 Std. Error of

the Estimates 0.713 0.706 0.706 0.704 0.699 0.692

F-value 9.934** 9.789*** 9.729*** 10.974*** 14.287*** 8.366*** Degree of

freedom (df)

Regression

1 2 2 2 2 5

Sig. *p<0.10, **p<0.05, ***p<0.001, N=437

S.E. (Standard Error) is present within parenthesis for each of the independent variables.

27

Table 7 illustrates the outcome of the linear regression between customer engagement

behavior and perceived relationship benefits on social media platform Instagram. There

were two hypothesis that was significant on a p<0.05-level and one hypothesis on a

p<0.10-level. 𝐻1𝑎 was significant on a p<0.05-level and indicating that reading

messages (and visiting) a brand community on Instagram lead to perceived relationship

benefits, practical benefits, social enhancement, entertainment benefits, and economic

benefits. 𝐻1𝑑 was also significant on a p<0.05-level and thus, purchasing products has

an impact on perceived relationship benefits. Furthermore, 𝐻1𝑏 had a significance level

of p<0.10 and accordingly imply that using the “like” option on a company’s pictures

on Instagram has some effect on the perceived relationship benefits. The only

hypothesis that did not show any significance was 𝐻1𝑐 indicating that writing comments

did not have any effect on perceived relationship benefits.

Moreover, the adjusted 𝑅2 for the overall model indicates that all of the variables

measuring customer engagement explain 7.8% of perceived benefits when measured on

Instagram. This is a fairly small number and indicates that there are other measures of

customer engagement on Instagram not present in the tested model that explains the

relationship between customer engagement and perceived relationship benefits. Further,

looking at the F-value for all of the models they all show significance on a p<0.001-

level, apart from Model 1 testing the control variable with a significance level of

p<0.05.

Moreover, looking at the changes in 𝑅2 in table 7 𝐻1𝑎, 𝐻1𝑏, and 𝐻1𝑑 were supported

(both the beta value of the separate model and model 6 were significant and hence,

supported). 𝐻1𝑐 were partially supported with a significance-level of p<0.001 on the

separate model and no significance in model 6.

28

Table 8. Hypothesis testing if perceived relationship benefits on Instagram brand communities have a

positive effect on relationship outcomes. Analysis method: Linear regression.

Model 1

Control Model 2

𝑧1

Model 3

𝑧2

Model 4

𝑧3

Model 5

𝑧4

Model 6

All

Constant 4.155 3.023 3.855 3.514 3.492 2.632

Control

variable

Age -0.165***

(0.032)

-0.114***

(0.029)

-0.154***

(0.031)

-0.158***

(0.030)

-0.119***

(0.030)

-0.097***

(0.028)

Customer

engagement

behavior

𝐻2𝑎 Practical

benefits will

have a positive

effect on

relationship

outcomes

0.366***

(0.36)

0.270***

(0.041)

𝐻2𝑏 Social

enhancement

will have a

positive effect

on relationship

outcomes

0.164***

(0.030)

-0.008

(0.031)

𝐻2𝑐

Entertainment

benefits will

have a positive

effect on

relationship

outcomes

0.203***

(0.030)

0.096***

(0.029)

𝐻2𝑑 Economic

benefits will

have a positive

effect on

relationship

outcomes

0.262***

(0.029)

0.157***

(0.031)

𝑅2 0.241 0.486 0.347 0.386 0.454 0.564

Adjusted 𝑅2 0.058 0.233 0.117 0.145 0.206 0.310 Std. Error of

the Estimates 0.697 0.628 0.674 0.663 0.641 0.596

F-value 26.864*** 67.137*** 29.747*** 37.947*** 56.226*** 40.215*** Degree of

freedom (df)

Regression

1 2 2 2 2 5

Sig. *p<0.10, **p<0.05, ***p<0.001, N=437

S.E. (Standard Error) is present within parenthesis for each of the independent variables.

Table 8 presents the result of the linear regression used to test hypotheses 𝐻2𝑎 - 𝐻2𝑑 on

the social media platform Instagram. 𝐻2𝑎 suggests that practical benefits have positive

effect on relationship outcome. The result was highly significant on a p<0.001-level

indicating experiencing practical benefits on Instagram have a positive effect on

relationship outcome. 𝐻2𝑏 did not show any significant and it can hence be argued that

social enhancement benefits on Instagram like get help from others does not lead to

relationship outcome – loyalty, trust, and satisfaction. 𝐻2𝑐 predicts that entertainment

benefits will have a positive effect on relationship outcome. This result was highly

significant on a p<0.001-level implying that entertainment benefits lead to loyalty, trust,

29

and satisfaction on Instagram. 𝐻2𝑑 suggest that that economic benefits have positive

effect on relationship outcome. The result was highly significant on a p<0.001-level and

it can thus be argued that customers who felt like they benefited economically in terms

of getting bonuses, participating in lotteries, and acquiring better service on Instagram

where more likely to experience higher levels of loyalty, trust, and satisfaction. Looking

at the adjusted 𝑅2 for all models the result was 0.310 meaning that perceived benefits

explain 31% of the total variance of relationship outcome. Furthermore, Model 1

control variable indicates that 5.8% of relationship outcome was explained by the

control variable (age of the customer). However, the control variable was significant on

a p<0.001-level and thus have some effect on the relation between perceived benefits

and relationship outcome.

The F-value is a test for statistical significance of the regression equation as a whole.

Furthermore, using the ‘rule of thumb’ a F-value of above 4 is statistically significant.

(Hair et al., 2014) Looking at the F-values presented in table 8, all of them are

considered significant on a p<0.001-level. Furthermore, looking at the changes in 𝑅2 in

table 8 all hypotheses except 𝐻2𝑏 were supported, 𝐻2𝑏 were partially supported with a

significance-level of p<0.001 in the separate model (model 3) but no statistical

significance in model 6.

30

4.3 Hypothesis

Table 9. Summary of hypothesis testing

Hypothesis Facebook

Not rejected/rejecte𝐝𝟏

Instagram

Not rejected/rejecte𝐝𝟏

𝐻1𝑎 = The frequency of reading messages

on brand communities will lead to

perceived relationship benefits.

Rejected* Not rejected**

𝐻1𝑏 = The frequency of using the “like”

option on brand communities will lead to

perceived relationship benefits.

Rejected Rejected*

𝐻1𝑐 = The frequency of writing comments

on brand communities will lead to

perceived relationship benefits.

Rejected Rejected

𝐻1𝑑 = The frequency of purchasing

products will lead to perceived relationship

benefits.

Rejected Not rejected**

𝐻2𝑎 = Practical benefits will have a

positive effect on relationship outcomes.

Not rejected**** Not rejected****

𝐻2𝑏 = Social enhancement will have a

positive effect on relationship outcomes.

Not rejected*** Rejected

𝐻2𝑐 = Entertainment benefits will have a

positive effect on relationship outcomes.

Rejected Not rejected****

𝐻2𝑑 = Economic benefits will have a

positive effect on relationship outcomes.

Not rejected**** Not rejected****

1 For a hypothesis to be not rejected the hypothesis testing model must be significant on at least the 5 percent level.

The significance level of each individual beta-value is indicated by p<0.10*, p<0.05**, p<0.01***, p<0.001****

The results of the linear regression findings in relation to the hypothesis are summarized

in table 9. Here a hypothesis is only categorized as ‘not rejected’ if the statistically

result is less than 5% (p<0.05). Furthermore, the results showed that all hypotheses of

customer engagement behavior and their effect on perceived benefits on Facebook

where to be rejected. These variables are not sufficient when measuring the relationship

between customer engagement (variables; read messages, use “like” option,

commenting, and purchase products) and perceived relationship benefits (variables;

practical benefits, social enhancement, entertainment benefits, and economic benefits).

Hence, there are no statistical significance between the frequency on which a customer

engage in customer engagement behaviors and whether or not they perceive relationship

benefits on a Facebook brand community. However, the results from the questionnaires

derived from social media platform Instagram show another result. Here 𝐻1𝑎 and 𝐻1𝑑

showed a significance level of p<0.05 and was not rejected. This indicates that the

frequency of which a customer read messages/visit the brand community on Instagram

and frequency of purchase have an effect on the customers perceived relationship

benefits.

31

Hypotheses 𝐻2𝑎 - 𝐻2𝑑 of the results derived from the social media platform Facebook

indicate that 𝐻2𝑎 (p<0.001), 𝐻2𝑏 (p<0.01) and 𝐻2𝑑 (p<0.001) were not to be rejected.

Hence, practical benefits and economic benefits have highly statistical significance on

the effect on relationship outcomes. This indicate that getting information through brand

communities, provide other group members with information, sharing ideas with other

group members, get bonuses, participate in lotteries, and get better service all have an

effect on relationship outcomes of loyalty, trust, and satisfaction on a Facebook brand

community. Moreover, hypothesis 𝐻2𝑏 have a significance of p<0.01 and further

indicates that social enhancement i.e. getting help from other community members on

Facebook have a positive effect on relationship outcome – loyalty, trust, and

satisfaction.

The hypotheses 𝐻2𝑎 - 𝐻2𝑑 of the results derived from the social media platform

Instagram indicated that 𝐻2𝑎 (p<0.001), 𝐻2𝑐 (p<0.001) and 𝐻2𝑑 (p<0.001) were not to

be rejected. This indicates that practical benefits, entertainment benefits, and economic

benefits have high statistical significance on the effect of relationship outcomes.

Furthermore, getting information through brand communities, provide other group

members with information, sharing ideas with other group members, get entertained,

pass time when bored, get bonuses, participate in lotteries, and get better service all

have an effect on relationship outcomes of loyalty, trust, and satisfaction on a Instagram

brand community. The results indicate that social enhancement is an important factor

when establishing relationship outcome (loyalty, trust, and satisfaction) on a Facebook

brand community while this is not at all important on an Instagram brand community.

Further, entertainment benefits are important on an Instagram brand community when

developing loyalty, trust, and satisfaction while this was not an important variable in a

Facebook brand community. Practical benefits and economic benefits were the two

variables that were statistically significant on both social media platforms and thus, can

be seen as important variables when measuring relationship outcome.

32

5. Discussion

Customer engagement behaviors are considered to be behaviors that go beyond

transactions and have a brand-focus resulting from motivational drivers. Though, the

transactional side of the relationship is important for the company. (van Doorn et al.,

2010; Gummerus et al., 2012) The presented findings emphasize on the notion that the

frequency on which a customer engage in the four measured engagement behaviors on

Facebook showed no statistical significance. The frequency of reading messages and

visiting the brand community showed a significance level of p<0.10, however this was

not considered enough to not reject the hypothesis. Furthermore, the presented findings

derived from the social media platform Instagram indicate that the frequency of

engagement behavior that had an effect on perceived relationship benefits on Instagram

was reading messages (and hence, visiting the brand community) and purchasing

products. This indicates that the frequency of transactional behavior is more strongly

correlated to perceived benefits on Instagram than it is on Facebook. Hence, it can be

interpreted that customers who follow a brand on Instagram and purchase products

frequently perceive more relationship benefits than those who follow a brand on

Facebook. Gummerus et al. (2012) found that transactional behavior did have a positive

impact on some of the perceived benefits (social and entertainment) when performing

their study on a Facebook brand community. This study did not find any relation

between the frequency of transactional engagement behavior on a Facebook brand

community and perceived benefits. However, as previously stated this relation was

significant on the other social media platform, Instagram.

Moreover, customer engagement encompasses co-creation where customers participate

in the creation of the core offering and these behaviors are usually spontaneous, like

writing comments (van Doorn et al., 2010). The findings derived from Facebook and

Instagram did not show any significance when measuring the frequency on which

customers engage in co-creating engagement behavior like use the “like” option and

writing comments. Hence, the frequency of using the “like” option and writing

comments on a Facebook and Instagram brand community has no effect on perceived

relationship benefits. Furthermore, van Doorn et al. (2010) argue that customer

engagement behavior is either ongoing or temporary, thus the results derived from the

linear regression of Instagram indicate that an ongoing behavior of visiting and reading

posts have an impact on perceived benefits. This however, make sense since perceived

33

benefits of a relationship on brand communities cannot occur if customers does not read

or visit the community frequently. Brodie et al. (2013) further argue that customer

engagement is largely affected by customers’ needs of information and that this is a

highly interactive process. Furthermore, the frequency on which a customer engage with

a brand community is referred to as modality and it one measurement of customer

engagement (van Doorn et al., 2010).

Gwinner et al. (1998) emphasizes that in order to maintain a relationship between two

parties, both must feel that they gain something from each other. A customer who

perceive benefits with a relationship will most likely result in relationship outcomes in

terms of loyalty, trust, and satisfaction, hence, hypotheses 𝐻2𝑎 - 𝐻2𝑑. Furthermore, the

result of linear regressions of hypotheses 𝐻2𝑎 - 𝐻2𝑑 showed that practical benefits,

social enhancement, and economic benefits had an effect on relationship outcome on

customers on Facebook brand communities. While practical benefits, entertainment

benefits, and economic benefits had an effect on relationship outcomes on customer on

Instagram brand communities.

Muniz and O’Guinn (2001) state that brand communities include members who feel a

connection to the brand and more importantly, a strong brand to other group members.

This statement is supported in hypothesis 𝐻2𝑎 and 𝐻2𝑏 tested on Facebook, since the

hypotheses supported that practical benefits and social enhancement benefits like

getting information from the company, provide other group members with information,

share ideas with other group members, and help other members had an impact on

relationship outcome – loyalty, trust, and satisfaction towards a brand. However, social

enhancement benefits (helping other group members) did not show any significance on

Instagram, nonetheless practical benefits showed significance. Benedikt and Werner

(2012) and van Doorn et al. (2010) further argue that customers are part of the co-

creation process within brand communities occur when customers participate in

spontaneous behavior like helping other customers. This co-creating behavior was

significant on Facebook, but not on Instagram. Hence, it can be argued that customers

who are part of an Instagram brand community does not feel that helping other group

members will lead to increased loyalty, trust, and satisfaction of a company.

Furthermore, van Doorn et al. (2010) argue that engagement derives from attitudinal

decent and that includes trust, satisfaction, commitment, and thus, loyalty towards a

brand and high or low levels of these factor lead to customer engagement. It can thus be

34

argued that relationship benefits leading to relationship outcomes in terms of higher

levels of loyalty, trust, and satisfaction will also lead to higher engagement. Hence, get

information, provide other members with information, share ideas with other group

members, get help from other group members, participating in lotteries, get bonuses,

and acquire better service on a Facebook brand community will ultimately lead to

higher customer engagement. Get information, provide other members with

information, share ideas with other group members, get entertained, get bonuses,

participate in lotteries, and acquire better service on an Instagram brand community will

lead to higher engagement.

Brodie et al. (2011) argue that customer engagement is a psychological state and that

customers who are engaged may experience confidence in a certain brand and thus, feel

passion for it. Men and Tsai (2014) further note that customers who are deeply engaged

with a company’s Facebook brand community tends to be more trusting and feel more

satisfied. It can be argued that customers who experience high levels of loyalty, trust,

and satisfaction are more likely to engage in engagement behavior and show their

passion towards the brand. Furthermore, Gummerus et al. (2012) state that successful

customer engagement behavior will lead to more engaged customers that will in turn

increase their engagement behavior actions. Hence, it can be argued that customers who

perceive relationship benefits that leads to loyalty, trust, and commitment (Facebook;

practical benefits, social enhancement, and economic benefits. Instagram; practical

benefits, entertainment benefits, and economic benefits) are more likely to further

engage in engagement behavior.

Customer engagement is individual and context dependent (van Doorn et al., 2010) and

this is further supported in this study. On the social media platform Facebook the

frequency on which customers employ customer engagement behaviors did not have

any significant effect on perceived relationship benefits. However, practical benefits,

social enhancement, and economic benefits did have an effect of relationship outcomes

of loyalty, trust, and satisfaction. On the social media platform Instagram the frequency

of reading messaged (visiting the brand community) and the frequency of purchasing

products did have a significant effect on perceived relationship benefits. Further, as with

Facebook, practical and economic benefits did have an impact on relationship outcome.

Also entertainment benefits showed to have a significant impact on relationship

outcome. Hence, the main difference between the two platforms regarding benefits and

35

relationship outcome is that customers engaged on Facebook valued social enhancement

of getting help from other group members more than customers engaged on Instagram.

Additionally, customers on Instagram valued entertainment benefits more than

customers engaged on Facebook. Hence, it can be argued that Instagram is more

focused on the notion of being entertained and pass time when bored as opposed to

Facebook where the interaction between users seems more meaningful.

36

6. Conclusions and implications

This study aimed to investigate the frequency of customer engagement behavior and its

affect on perceived relationship benefits and ultimately, relationship outcomes. This

based on three different social media platforms where one company is present with

brand communities and then compare the outcome of each platform with each other. It

can be concluded that the frequency on which a customer spends performing

engagement behavior on a Facebook brand community did not have an effect on

perceived relationship benefits. However, the frequency on which a customer read

messages, and hence, visit the brand page and the frequency of purchase did have a

significant effect on perceived benefits on Instagram brand pages.

It can also be concluded that practical benefits and economic benefits like get

information, provide other group members with information, share ideas with other

group members, participate in lotteries, get bonuses, and acquire better service and its

effects on relationship outcome was significant for both social media platforms.

Though, social enhancement, i.e. get help from others, and its relation to relationship

outcome of loyalty, trust, and satisfaction were only significant for the results derived

from Facebook whilst entertainment benefits showed to have an impact on relationship

outcome on Instagram only. These two platforms are different to each other and

customers engagement behaviors differ based on which platform it occurs, hence, it is

important for companies to use different strategies for each platform in order to

maximize their customers engagement.

6.1 Theoretical contributions

The findings of this study provide further guidelines within the field of customer

engagement on brand communities on social media. This study was based on previous

literature investigating customer engagement behavior on social media platform

Facebook (Weman, 2011; Gummerus et al., 2012). However, this study further

investigated the variables on an additional social media platform - Instagram.

Researchers have argued that measuring customer engagement on other platforms than

Facebook is of interest due to the different characteristics of each platform (Gummerus

et al., 2012; Men & Tsai, 2014). Moreover, Malthouse and Calder (2011) have stated

that customer engagement is comprehended through customer experience and that these

experiences are context dependent. Hence, this study has taken the discussion regarding

37

frequency of customer engagement and its impact on perceived benefits and further,

relationship outcome to another level when introducing the new context, Instagram. The

theoretical contribution of this study is thus the new introduced context which takes the

notion of customer engagement further.

6.2 Managerial implications

The findings of this study help companies to further understand how to engage their

customers on brand communities on different social media platforms, and hence

generate loyalty, trust, and satisfaction towards the company. In line with the findings,

companies who wish to provide the best brand community on Facebook should focus on

offering practical benefits, social enhancement, and economic benefits to their

followers. Moreover, companies should focus on providing their followers with

information (e.g. of new products), enable social communication between the company

and its followers, provide with lotteries, bonuses, and better service. Further, it can be

concluded that it is not the frequency on which followers participate in customer

engagement behaviors on Facebook has an effect on perceived relationship benefits.

When ensuring long term engagement behavior companies should form their strategy so

that it emphasize practical benefits, social enhancement, and economic benefits on

Facebook.

Companies who want to provide the best brand community on Instagram should focus

on offering practical benefits, entertainment benefits, and economic benefits to their

followers. Hence, companies active on Instagram should focus on providing their

followers with information regarding e.g. new products, focus on entertaining their

followers and offer entertaining elements such as videos and photos (furthermore, this is

how Instagram is being used i.e. posting videos and pictures), and provide their

followers with lotteries, bonuses, and service. Moreover, it is considered essential for

companies to understand customer engagement behaviors and it is further important to

understand different engagement behaviors that occur on different social media

platforms (Gummerus et al., 2012; Men & Tsai, 2014; Malthouse & Calder, 2011). This

study emphasizes the differences between the two social media platforms Instagram and

Facebook and what kind of benefits that lead to loyalty, trust, and satisfaction – and

further, more customer engagement behavior. Hence, it is important for companies to

know what to offer their followers in order to generate as engaged customers as

possible.

38

6.3 Limitations and suggestions for further research

There are several studies conducted within the field of customer engagement behaviors,

however, this is one of the first ones to compare the results between two different social

media platforms. However, this study contains some limitations that need to be taken

into consideration. First, only the frequency of four customer engagement behaviors

was measured (read messages, use “like” option, write comments, and purchase

products). Second, the self-selection of respondents may have resulted in a lower

number of respondents since passive customers are less keen on filling in a

questionnaire and thus, not all community users were participating in this study. Third,

this study was limited to only one company active on both Instagram and Facebook,

hence, the result are somewhat based on the fashion industry and might not be

applicable on other industries.

Furthermore, future studies should look into more parameters of customer engagement

and see if the frequency of engaging in these has any significant effect on perceived

relationship benefits. Future studies should also look into other social media platforms

like Pinterest, Tumblr, LinkedIn, and Snapchat etc. in order to further understand the

differences of customer engagement across different contexts. It would also be

interesting for future studies to combine quantitative questionnaires with qualitative

interviews or focus groups with some of the respondents in order to acquire deeper

knowledge regarding the connections of frequency of engagement behavior and its

relation with perceived relationship benefits, and perceived relationship benefits

connected to relationship outcomes. It would further be of interest to look into

industries other than fashion (as in this study) and gaming (as in Weman, 2011 and

Gummerus et al., 2012).

39

References

Benedikt, J. and Werner, K. (2012), How to transform consumers into fans of your

brand, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 344-361

Bitter, S., Grabner-Kräuter, S. and Breitenecker, R. J. (2014), Customer engagement

behaviour in online social networks – the Facebook perspective, Int. J.

Networking and Virtual Organisations, Vol. 14, No. 1/2, pp. 197-220

Bowden, J. L., Gabbott, M. and Naumann, K. (2014), Service relationships and the

customer disengagement – engagement conundrum, Journal of Marketing

Management, DOI: 10.1080/0267257X.2014.983143

Brodie, R. J., Hollebeek, L. D., Jurić, B. and Ilić, A. (2011), Customer Engagement:

Conceptual Domain, Fundamental Propositions, and Implications for Research,

Journal of Service Research, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 252-271

Brodie, R. J., Ilic, A., Biljana, J. and Hollebeek, L. (2013), Consumer engagement in a

virtual brand community: an exploratory analysis, Journal of Business Research,

Vol. 66, No. 1, pp. 105-114

Bruhn, M., Schoenmueller, V. and Schäfer, D. B. (2012), Are social media replacing

traditional media in terms of brand equity creation?, Management Research

Review, Vol. 35, No. 9, pp. 770-790

Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2011), Business Research Methods, 3rd

ed., Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Bunker, M. P., Rajendran, K. N. and Corbin, S. B. (2013), The antecedents of

satisfaction for Facebook “likers” and their effect on word-of-mouth, The

Marketing Management Journal, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 21-34

Constantinides, E. and Fountain, S. J. (2008), Web 2.0: Conceptual foundations and

marketing issues, Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, Vol. 9,

No. 3, pp. 231-244

Devine, Å. (2010), Internationalization and performance among small and medium-

sized firms – a study of furniture producers in Sweden, Diss., Linnaeus University

40

Dholakia, U. M., Bagozzi, R. P. and Pearo, L. K. (2004), A social influence model of

consumer participation in network- and small-group based virtual communities,

International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 21, pp. 241-263

Facebook (2015), Om Facebook,

https://www.facebook.com/facebook/info?tab=page_info (Accessed: 2015-04-19)

Gummerus, J., Liljander, V., Weman, E. and Pihlström, M. (2012), Customer

engagement in a Facebook brand community, Management Research Review,

Vol. 35, No. 9, pp. 857-877

Gwinner, K. P, Gremler, D. D. and Bitner, M. J. (1998), Relational benefits in service

industries: the customer’s perspective, Journal of the Academy of Marketing

Science, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 101-114

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. and Anderson, R. E. (2014), Multivariate data

analysis, 7th

ed., Harlow: Pearson Education Limited

Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S. and Brodie, R. J. (2014), Consumer Brand Engagement

in Social Media: Conceptualization, Scale Development and Validation, Journal

of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 149.165

Instagram (2015), About us, https://instagram.com/about/us/ (Accessed: 2015-04-19)

Kabadayi, S. and Price, K. (2014), Consumer – brand engagement on Facebook: linking

and commenting behaviors, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, Vol. 8,

No. 3, pp. 203-223

Kaplan, A. M. and Haenlein, M. (2010), Users of the world, unite! The challenges and

opportunities of Social Media, Business Horizons, Vol. 52, No. 1, pp. 59-68

Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K. McCarthy, I. P. and Silverstre, B. S. (2011), Social

media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media,

Business Horizons, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 241-251

Laroche, M., Reza Habibi, M. and Richard, M-O (2013), To be or not to be in social

media: How brand loyalty is affected by social media?, International Journal of

Information Management, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 76-82

41

Laroche, M., Reza Habibi, M., Richard, M-O. and Sankaranarayanan, R. (2012), The

effects of social media based brand communities on brand community markets,

value creation practices, brand trust and brand loyalty, Computers in Human

Behavior, Vol. 28, No. 5, pp. 1755-1767

Malhotra, N. K. and Birks, D. F. (2003), Marketing Research – An Applied Approach,

Prentice Hall, Pearson Education, Scotland

Malthouse, E. C. and Calder, B. J. (2011), Comment: engagement and experiences:

comments on Brodie, Hollenbeck, Juric and Ilic (2011), Journal of Service

Research, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 277-279

Men, L. R. and Tsai, W-H. S. (2014), Perceptual, Attitudinal, and Behavioral Outcomes

of Organization–Public Engagement on Corporate Social Networking Sites,

Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 417-435

Muniz, A. Jr and O’Guinn, T. (2001) “Brand community”, Journal of Consumer

Research, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 412-432

Nair, M. (2011), Understanding and measuring the value of social media, Journal of

Corporate Accounting & Finance, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 45-51

Ouwersloot, H. and Oderken-Schröder, G. (2008), Who’s who in brand communities –

and why?, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 42, No. 5/6, pp. 571-585

Pinterest (2015), Vad är Pinterest?, https://about.pinterest.com/sv/whats-pinterest

(Accessed: 2015-04-19)

Sashi, C. M. (2012), Customer engagement, buyer-seller relationships, and social

media, Management Decision, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 253-272

Sprott, D., Sandor, C. and Spangenberg, E. (2009), The Importance of a General

Measure of Brand Engagement on Market Behavior: Development and Validation

of a Scale, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 46, No. 1, pp. 92-104

Tsimonis, G. and Dimitriadis, S. (2014), Brand strategies in social media, Marketing

Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 328-344

42

Van Doorn, J., Lemon, K. N., Mittal, V., Nass, S., Pick, D., Pirner, P. and Verhoef, P.

C. (2010), Customer Engagement Behavior: Theoretical Foundations and

Research Directions, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 253-266

Verhoef, P. C., Reinartz, W. J. and Krafft, M. (2010), Customer Engagement as a New

Perspecive in Customer Management, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 13, No.

3, pp. 247-252

Wakakuu (2015), Om Wakakuu, http://www.wakakuu.com/se/wakakuu/om-wakakuu/

(Accessed: 2015-05-19)

Weman, E. (2011), Consumer motivations to join a brand community on Facebook,

Department of Marketing, Hanken School of Economics, Helsinki.

Wirtz, J., den Ambtman, A., Bloemer, J., Horváth, C., Ramaseshan, B., van de

Klundert, J., Gurhan Canli, Z. and Kandampully, J. (2013), Managing brands and

customer engagement in online brand communities, Journal of Service

Management, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 223-244

Yin, R. K. (2009), Case study research: design and methods, 4th

ed., London: SAGE

I

Appendices

Appendix 1 Questionnaire, Facebook, Swedish version

Välkommen till denna enkät om konsumentengagemang på sociala medier. Enkäten

kommer användas i en masteruppsats inom marknadsföring och svaren är helt anonyma.

Enkäten består av 27 frågor och tar några minuter att besvara. Vänligen uppskatta hur

mycket du instämmer eller inte instämmer med påståendena på fråga 6-25, skalan är 1-5

(1 = instämmer inte alls 5 = instämmer helt)

För att vara med i utlottningen av en underbar clutch från By Malene Birger vänligen

fyll i din mail-adress i slutet av enkäten.

Har du frågor? Vänligen kontakta sarahsjoqvist@gmail.com

Tack på förhand!

1. Hur ofta besöker du Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida?

Dagligen

Varje vecka

En gång i månaden

Mer sällan än en gång i månaden

2. Hur ofta läser du Wakakuu’s Facebook-inlägg?

Dagligen

Varje vecka

En gång i månaden

Mer sällan än en gång i månaden

3. Hur ofta använder du ”gilla” funktionen på Wakakuu’s Facebook-inlägg eller andra

Facebook-inlägg om Wakakuu?

Ofta

Ibland

Sällan

Aldrig

4. Hur ofta skriver du kommentarer på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida?

Ofta

II

Ibland

Sällan

Aldrig

5. Hur ofta köper du produkter från Wakakuu?

Dagligen

Veckovis

Månadsvis

Köper inte produkter från Wakakuu

6. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att få information (t.ex. om nya

produkter).

7. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att erbjuda andra gruppmedlemmar

information.

8. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att dela med mig av idéer till andra

gruppmedlemmar.

9. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att få hjälp av andra

gruppmedlemmar.

10. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att bli underhållen.

11. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att fördriva tiden när jag har tråkigt.

12. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att få bonusar.

13. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att medverka i utlottningar.

14. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att få bättre service.

15. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att Wakakuu är den ultimata

online- och offline-butiken för lyx märkesvaror.

16. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att jag tycker om Wakakuu.

17. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida även om jag inte tycker om Wakakuu.

18. Jag är medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida för att jag är lojal till Wakakuu.

19. Medlemskap på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida har ökat mitt förtroende för Wakakuu.

20. Medlemskap på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida gör mig mindre orolig när jag handlar av

Wakakuu.

21. Jag säger positiva saker om Wakakuu till andra människor.

22. Jag skulle rekommendera Wakakuu till mina vänner.

23. Jag är nöjd med mitt beslut att bli medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida.

24. Jag är inte nöjd med mitt beslut att bli medlem på Wakakuu’s Facebook-sida.

III

25. Jag är nöjd med Wakakuu.

26. Vänligen ange din ålder

Under 18

18-24

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-64

65-74

Över 75

27. Vänligen ange kön

Kvinna

Man

Vill ej uppge

Vänligen fyll i fin e-post adress för att medverka i utlottningen av en clutch by Malene

Birger. Vinnaren kommer utses i slutet av maj och kontaktas via mail.

__________________________________________________

IV

Appendix 2 Questionnaire, Facebook, English version

Welcome to this questionnaire about customer engagement on social media. The

questionnaire will be used in a master thesis in marketing and the answers are

completely anonymous. The questionnaire consists of 27 questions and will take a

couple of minutes to answer. Please indicate how much you either agree or disagree

with the statements on question 6-25, the scale is 1-5 (1 = completely disagree 5 =

completely agree)

In order to participate in the raffle of a wonderful clutch from By Malene Birger please

fill in your e-mail address by the end of the questionnaire.

Do you have any questions? Please contact sarahsjoqvist@gmail.com

Thank you in advance!

1. How often do you visit Wakakuu’s Facebook-page?

Daily

Every week

Once a month

More seldom than once a month

2. How often do you read Wakakuu’s Facebook-posts?

Daily

Every week

Once a month

More seldom than once a month

3. How often do you use the “like” option on Wakakuu’s Facebook-posts or other

Facebook-posts about Wakakuu?

Often

Sometimes

Seldom

Never

4. How often do you write comments on Wakakuu’s Facebook-page?

Often

Sometimes

V

Seldom

Never

5. How often do you purchase products from Wakakuu?

Daily

Weekly

Monthly

I do not purchase products from Wakakuu

6. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member to get information (e.g. new products).

7. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member to provide other group members with

information.

8. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member to share my ideas with other group

members

9. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member to get help from other community

members.

10. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member to get entertained.

11. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member to pass time when I am bored.

12. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member to try to get bonuses.

13. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member to participate in lotteries.

14. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member to get better service.

15. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member because Wakakuu is the ultimate online

and offline store for luxury brands.

16. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member because I like Wakakuu.

17. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member even tough I do not like Wakakuu.

18. I am a Wakakuu Facebook group member because I am loyal to Wakakuu.

19. Wakakuu Facebook community membership increased my trust in Wakakuu.

20. Wakakuu Facebook community membership makes me less concerned when I use

Wakakuu’s services.

21. I say positive things about Wakakuu to other people.

22. I would recommend Wakakuu to my friends.

23. I am satisfied with my decision to become a member of Wakakuu’s Facebook

community.

24. I am not satisfied with my decision to become a member of Wakakuu’s Facebook

community.

VI

25. I am satisfied with Wakakuu.

26. Please indicate your age

Below 18

18-24

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-64

65-74

Above 75

27. Please indicate your gender

Female

Male

Do not want to answer

Please fill in your e-mail address in order to participate in the raffle of a clutch by

Malene Birger. The winner will be announced by the end of May and will be contacted

by e-mail.

__________________________________________________

VII

Appendix 3 Questionnaire, Instagram, Swedish version

Välkommen till denna enkät om konsumentengagemang på sociala medier. Enkäten

kommer användas i en masteruppsats inom marknadsföring och svaren är helt anonyma.

Enkäten består av 27 frågor och tar några minuter att besvara. Vänligen uppskatta hur

mycket du instämmer eller inte instämmer med påståendena på fråga 6-25, skalan är 1-5

(1 = instämmer inte alls 5 = instämmer helt)

För att vara med i utlottningen av en underbar clutch från By Malene Birger vänligen

fyll i din mail-adress i slutet av enkäten.

Har du frågor? Vänligen kontakta sarahsjoqvist@gmail.com

Tack på förhand!

1. Hur ofta besöker du Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida?

Dagligen

Varje vecka

En gång i månaden

Mer sällan än en gång i månaden

2. Hur ofta läser du Wakakuu’s Instagram-inlägg?

Dagligen

Varje vecka

En gång i månaden

Mer sällan än en gång i månaden

3. Hur ofta använder du ”gilla” funktionen på Wakakuu’s Instagram-inlägg eller andra

Instagram-inlägg om Wakakuu?

Ofta

Ibland

Sällan

Aldrig

4. Hur ofta skriver du kommentarer på Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida?

Ofta

Ibland

Sällan

VIII

Aldrig

5. Hur ofta köper du produkter från Wakakuu?

Dagligen

Veckovis

Månadsvis

Köper inte produkter från Wakakuu

6. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att få information (t.ex. om nya produkter).

7. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att erbjuda andra gruppmedlemmar

information.

8. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att dela med mig av idéer till andra

gruppmedlemmar.

9. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att få hjälp av andra gruppmedlemmar.

10. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att bli underhållen.

11. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att fördriva tiden när jag har tråkigt.

12. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att få bonusar.

13. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att medverka i utlottningar.

14. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att få bättre service.

15. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att Wakakuu är den ultimata online- och

offline-butiken för lyx märkesvaror.

16. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att jag tycker om Wakakuu.

17. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida även om jag inte tycker om Wakakuu.

18. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida för att jag är lojal till Wakakuu.

19. Att följa Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida har ökat mitt förtroende för Wakakuu.

20. Att följa Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida gör mig mindre orolig när jag handlar av

Wakakuu.

21. Jag säger positiva saker om Wakakuu till andra människor.

22. Jag skulle rekommendera Wakakuu till mina vänner.

23. Jag är nöjd med mitt beslut att följa på Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida.

24. Jag är inte nöjd med mitt beslut att följa på Wakakuu’s Instagram-sida.

25. Jag är nöjd med Wakakuu.

26. Vänligen ange din ålder

Under 18

18-24

IX

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-64

65-74

Över 75

27. Vänligen ange kön

Kvinna

Man

Vill ej uppge

Vänligen fyll i fin e-post adress för att medverka i utlottningen av en clutch by Malene

Birger. Vinnaren kommer utses i slutet av maj och kontaktas via mail.

__________________________________________________

X

Appendix 4 Questionnaire, Instagram, English version

Welcome to this questionnaire about customer engagement on social media. The

questionnaire will be used in a master thesis in marketing and the answers are

completely anonymous. The questionnaire consists of 27 questions and will take a

couple of minutes to answer. Please indicate how much you either agree or disagree

with the statements on question 6-25, the scale is 1-5 (1 = completely disagree 5 =

completely agree)

In order to participate in the raffle of a wonderful clutch from By Malene Birger please

fill in your e-mail address by the end of the questionnaire.

Do you have any questions? Please contact sarahsjoqvist@gmail.com

Thank you in advance!

1. How often do you visit Wakakuu’s Instagram-page?

Daily

Every week

Once a month

More seldom than once a month

2. How often do you read Wakakuu’s Instagram-posts?

Daily

Every week

Once a month

More seldom than once a month

3. How often do you use the “like” option on Wakakuu’s Instagram-posts or other

Instagram-posts about Wakakuu?

Often

Sometimes

Seldom

Never

4. How often do you write comments on Wakakuu’s Instagram-page?

Often

Sometimes

XI

Seldom

Never

5. How often do you purchase products from Wakakuu?

Daily

Weekly

Monthly

I do not purchase products from Wakakuu

6. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram to get information (e.g. new products).

7. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram to provide other group members with information.

8. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram to share my ideas with other group members

9. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram to get help from other community members.

10. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram to get entertained.

11. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram to pass time when I am bored.

12. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram to try to get bonuses.

13. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram to participate in lotteries.

14. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram to get better service.

15. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram because Wakakuu is the ultimate online and offline

store for luxury brands.

16. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram because I like Wakakuu.

17. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram even tough I do not like Wakakuu.

18. I follow Wakakuu on Instagram because I am loyal to Wakakuu.

19. Follow Wakakuu on Instagram has increased my trust in Wakakuu.

20. Follow Wakakuu on Instagram makes me less concerned when I use Wakakuu’s

services.

21. I say positive things about Wakakuu to other people.

22. I would recommend Wakakuu to my friends.

23. I am satisfied with my decision to follow Wakakuu’s Instagram-page.

24. I am not satisfied with my decision to b follow Wakakuu’s Instagram-page.

25. I am satisfied with Wakakuu.

26. Please indicate your age

Below 18

18-24

XII

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-64

65-74

Above 75

27. Please indicate your gender

Female

Male

Do not want to answer

Please fill in your e-mail address in order to participate in the raffle of a clutch by

Malene Birger. The winner will be announced by the end of May and will be contacted

by e-mail.

__________________________________________________

XIII

Appendix 5 Questionnaire, Pinterest, Swedish version

Välkommen till denna enkät om konsumentengagemang på sociala medier. Enkäten

kommer användas i en masteruppsats inom marknadsföring och svaren är helt anonyma.

Enkäten består av 27 frågor och tar några minuter att besvara. Vänligen uppskatta hur

mycket du instämmer eller inte instämmer med påståendena på fråga 6-25, skalan är 1-5

(1 = instämmer inte alls 5 = instämmer helt)

För att vara med i utlottningen av en underbar clutch från By Malene Birger vänligen

fyll i din mail-adress i slutet av enkäten.

Har du frågor? Vänligen kontakta sarahsjoqvist@gmail.com

Tack på förhand!

1. Hur ofta besöker du Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida?

Dagligen

Varje vecka

En gång i månaden

Mer sällan än en gång i månaden

2. Hur ofta läser du Wakakuu’s Pinteret-inlägg?

Dagligen

Varje vecka

En gång i månaden

Mer sällan än en gång i månaden

3. Hur ofta använder du ”pin” funktionen på Wakakuu’s Pinterest-inlägg eller andra

Pinterest-inlägg om Wakakuu?

Ofta

Ibland

Sällan

Aldrig

4. Hur ofta skriver du kommentarer på Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida?

Ofta

Ibland

Sällan

XIV

Aldrig

5. Hur ofta köper du produkter från Wakakuu?

Dagligen

Veckovis

Månadsvis

Köper inte produkter från Wakakuu

6. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att få information (t.ex. om nya produkter).

7. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att erbjuda andra gruppmedlemmar

information.

8. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att dela med mig av idéer till andra

gruppmedlemmar.

9. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att få hjälp av andra gruppmedlemmar.

10. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att bli underhållen.

11. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att fördriva tiden när jag har tråkigt.

12. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att få bonusar.

13. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att medverka i utlottningar.

14. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att få bättre service.

15. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att Wakakuu är den ultimata online- och

offline-butiken för lyx märkesvaror.

16. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att jag tycker om Wakakuu.

17. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida även om jag inte tycker om Wakakuu.

18. Jag följer Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida för att jag är lojal till Wakakuu.

19. Att följa Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida a har ökat mitt förtroende för Wakakuu.

20. Att följa Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida gör mig mindre orolig när jag handlar av

Wakakuu.

21. Jag säger positiva saker om Wakakuu till andra människor.

22. Jag skulle rekommendera Wakakuu till mina vänner.

23. Jag är nöjd med mitt beslut att följa på Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida.

24. Jag är inte nöjd med mitt beslut att följa på Wakakuu’s Pinterest-sida.

25. Jag är nöjd med Wakakuu.

26. Vänligen ange din ålder

Under 18

18-24

XV

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-64

65-74

Över 75

27. Vänligen ange kön

Kvinna

Man

Vill ej uppge

Vänligen fyll i fin e-post adress för att medverka i utlottningen av en clutch by Malene

Birger. Vinnaren kommer utses i slutet av maj och kontaktas via mail.

__________________________________________________

XVI

Appendix 6 Questionnaire, Pinterest, English version

Welcome to this questionnaire about customer engagement on social media. The

questionnaire will be used in a master thesis in marketing and the answers are

completely anonymous. The questionnaire consists of 27 questions and will take a

couple of minutes to answer. Please indicate how much you either agree or disagree

with the statements on question 6-25, the scale is 1-5 (1 = completely disagree 5 =

completely agree)

In order to participate in the raffle of a wonderful clutch from By Malene Birger please

fill in your e-mail address by the end of the questionnaire.

Do you have any questions? Please contact sarahsjoqvist@gmail.com

Thank you in advance!

1. How often do you visit Wakakuu’s Pinterest-page?

Daily

Every week

Once a month

More seldom than once a month

2. How often do you read Wakakuu’s Pinterest-posts?

Daily

Every week

Once a month

More seldom than once a month

3. How often do you use the “pin” option on Wakakuu’s Pinterst-posts or other

Pinterest-posts about Wakakuu?

Often

Sometimes

Seldom

Never

4. How often do you write comments on Wakakuu’s Pinterest-page?

Often

Sometimes

XVII

Seldom

Never

5. How often do you purchase products from Wakakuu?

Daily

Weekly

Monthly

I do not purchase products from Wakakuu

6. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest to get information (e.g. new products).

7. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest to provide other group members with information.

8. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest to share my ideas with other group members

9. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest to get help from other community members.

10. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest to get entertained.

11. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest to pass time when I am bored.

12. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest to try to get bonuses.

13. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest to participate in lotteries.

14. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest to get better service.

15. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest because Wakakuu is the ultimate online and offline

store for luxury brands.

16. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest because I like Wakakuu.

17. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest even tough I do not like Wakakuu.

18. I follow Wakakuu on Pinterest because I am loyal to Wakakuu.

19. Follow Wakakuu on Pinterest has increased my trust in Wakakuu.

20. Follow Wakakuu on Pinterest makes me less concerned when I use Wakakuu’s

services.

21. I say positive things about Wakakuu to other people.

22. I would recommend Wakakuu to my friends.

23. I am satisfied with my decision to follow Wakakuu’s Pinterest-page.

24. I am not satisfied with my decision to b follow Wakakuu’s Pinterest-page.

25. I am satisfied with Wakakuu.

26. Please indicate your age

Below 18

18-24

XVIII

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-64

65-74

Above 75

27. Please indicate your gender

Female

Male

Do not want to answer

Please fill in your e-mail address in order to participate in the raffle of a clutch by

Malene Birger. The winner will be announced by the end of May and will be contacted

by e-mail.

__________________________________________________

XIX

Appendix 7 Correlation analysis, tables

Facebook

Table 10. Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation coefficients

Variables Min Max Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Perceived benefits 1 5 2.38 0.74 -

2. Read messages 1 4 1.98 0.78 -0.17* -

3. Use “like” option 1 4 2.01 1.03 -0.07 0.24** -

4. Write comments 1 4 3.24 0.97 -0.17* 0.19** 0.37** -

5. Purchase products 1 4 3.33 0.67 -0.10 0.21** 0.20** 0.27** -

6. Age - - - - -0.34** 0.01 -0.11 0.03 0.01 -

Notes: N=167; p<0.05*, p<0.01** (two-tailed)

Table 11. Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation coefficients

Variables Min Max Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Relationship outcome 1 5 3.65 0.79 -

2. Practical benefits 1 5 2.62 0.81 0.39** -

3. Social enhancement 1 5 1.82 1.17 0.40** 0.46** -

4. Entertainment benefits 1 5 2.54 1.17 0.24** 0.18* 0.17* -

5. Economic benefits 1 5 2.54 1.18 0.52** 0.19* 0.35** 0.30** -

6. Age - - - - -0.36** -0.23** -0.17 -0.26** -0.32** -

Notes: N=167; p<0.05*, p<0.01** (two-tailed)

Instagram

Table 12. Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation coefficients

Variables Min Max Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Perceived benefits 1 5 2.48 0.73 -

2. Read messages 1 4 1.33 0.51 -0.13** -

3. Use “like” option 1 4 1.74 0.87 -0.17** 0.47 -

4. Write comments 1 4 3.03 0.97 -0.18** 0.14** 0.47** -

5. Purchase products 1 4 3.19 0.60 -0.21** 0.22** 0.13** 0.29** -

6. Age - - - - -0.14** -0.09* 0.21** 0.15** 0.11* -

Notes: N=437; p<0.05*, p<0.01** (two-tailed)

Table 13. Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation coefficients

Variables Min Max Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Relationship outcome 1 5 3.88 0.71 -

2. Practical benefits 1 5 2.86 0.84 0.45** -

3. Social enhancement 1 5 1.72 1.09 0.26** 0.49** -

4. Entertainment benefits 1 5 3.11 1.06 0.30** 0.25* 0.21** -

5. Economic benefits 1 5 2.23 1.06 0.42** 0.36* 0.34** 0.35** -

6. Age - - - - -0.24** -0.17** -0.06 -0.03** -0.17** -

Notes: N=437; p<0.05*, p<0.01** (two-tailed)