Journal of Promotion Management
ISSN: 1049-6491 (Print) 1540-7594 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjpm20
Does Social Media Matter? Investigating the Effect
of Social Media Features on Consumer Attitudes
Denni Arli
To cite this article: Denni Arli (2017) Does Social Media Matter? Investigating the Effect of Social
Media Features on Consumer Attitudes, Journal of Promotion Management, 23:4, 521-539, DOI:
10.1080/10496491.2017.1297974
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2017.1297974
Published online: 06 Sep 2017.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 13
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wjpm20
Download by: [University of Sussex Library]
Date: 20 September 2017, At: 21:21
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT
2017, VOL. 23, NO. 4, 521–539
https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2017.1297974
Does Social Media Matter? Investigating the Effect of Social
Media Features on Consumer Attitudes
Denni Arli
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
Griffith University, Nathan, QLD, Australia
ABSTRACT
KEYWORDS
The purpose of this study is to explore the impact of social media’s
features (i.e., entertainment, usefulness, informativeness and
irritation) toward consumers’ attitude toward the brand.
Subsequently, this study explores the impact of this attitude toward
consumers’ brand loyalty, brand awareness and purchase intention.
Data for this study was collected through a large public university in
Australia. Paper surveys were distributed to students, their friends
and members of their immediate families (N D 724). The findings
show that entertainment feature has the strongest impact on
consumers’ attitude toward the brand’s social media use, followed
by informativeness, usefulness and finally, irritation. Consumers’
attitude toward a brand’s social media strongly influences consumer
loyalty, awareness and purchase intention. The findings of this
research provide some insights into the impact of different features
of social media which will be useful for practitioners and academics
interested in social media.
online attitude; online brand
awareness; online brand
loyalty; online purchase
intention; social media
Introduction
Social media have infiltrated people’s daily life with amazing rapidity to become one
of the most important social platforms for computer-mediated communication
(Correa, Hinsley, & De Zuniga, 2010; Lin & Lu, 2011; Powell, 2009; Schivinski &
Dabrowski, 2008). Marketers are searching for ideas to base their marketing
strategies on how to engage and influence their customers (Hoffman & Novak,
2012). A report shows that 74% of online adults in the United States are on social
networking sites (Pew Research Center, 2014), with Facebook leading the way. In
2013, 94% of U.S. teens on social media reported having a Facebook account and
spent average of 9 hours a day using media (Common sense, 2015). Recently,
Facebook reported daily active users totaled 890 million with advertising revenue
jumping 53% to $3.59 billion (CNBC, 2015). Since its inception, social media has
changed how consumers and marketers communicate (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2004;
CONTACT Denni Arli
d.arli@griffith.edu.au
Department of Marketing, Griffith Business School, Building
N.63, Room 2.11, Nathan campus, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, QLD 4111, Australia.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/wjpm.
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed on the publisher’s website.
© 2017 Taylor & Francis
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
522
D. ARLI
Papasolomou & Melanthiou, 2012). Moreover, other social media sites such as Instagram, Pinterest, Tumblr and Snapchat are also among the fastest growing social
media sites. In Australia, Facebook continues to dominate the social media space
(93%) with an average of eight and a half hours a week on that sited (Sensis, 2015).
Similarly, in the United States, people aged 18–64 spend an average of 3.2 hours a
day on social media (IPSOS, 2013). People in the United States now spend more
time on social media than any other internet activity (Adler, 2013). Furthermore, a
report suggests that more than 50% of social media users follow brands on social
media (Van Belleghen, Eenhuizen, & Veris, 2011). While many studies have found
the positive impact of social media on marketing activities (Bagozzi & Dholakia,
2006; Hausman & Siekpe, 2008), little is known about which factors influence consumers’ attitudes toward social media and the impact of these attitudes on branding
and purchase intention. Most of studies have focused on websites (Ha & Stoel, 2009;
Chen, Hsu, & Lin, 2010; Luo, 2002), but less on social media (Goodrich & de Mooij,
2014; Georgios & Dimitriadis, 2014). This creates a gap in the minds of marketing
practitioners about whether social media promotion really had an impact on consumers’ attitudes. Previous studies on advertising have clearly indicated that attitudes
toward ads are the most essential indicator of advertising effectiveness and outcomes
(Aaker & Stayman, 1990; Luo, 2002; MacKenzie, Lutz, & Belch, 1986; Pace, Balboni,
& Gistri, 2014). In the context of advertising, studies found four key features that
influence how consumers perceive advertisings: (1) entertainment. This factor has a
positive impact on brand attitude (Mackenzie & Luts, 1989). An entertaining advertising were able to fulfil consumers need for escapism, diversion or emotional release
(McQuail, 1983); (2) usefulness; consumers will decide whether to use or not use an
application based on how useful the application is (Davis, 1989); (3) informativeness.
Consumers found that supplying information is the primary reason of their acceptance toward advertising (Lee & Hong, 2016); (4) irritation. Studies found that the
reason consumers criticize an advertising is related to irritation (Hasan, 2016; MartıParre~
no, Aldas-Manzano, Curras-Perez, & Sanchez-Garcıa, 2013). In summary,
studies show that attitude toward an advertising or website is positively influenced
by entertainment factor (Alpar, 1999; Taylor, Lewin, & Strutton, 2011), perceived
usefulness, perceived entertainment and negatively influenced by perceived irritation
(Aaker & Stayman, 1990; Chen, Gillenson, & Sherrel, 2002; Ducoffe, 1995; Hausman
& Siekpe, 2009). Therefore, in a related vein, these four features can be used to investigate how consumers perceived social media. Investigating consumers’ attitudes
toward social media is crucial in order to understand the effectiveness of these platforms. Thus, the purpose of this study is: (1) to explore the impact of social media’s
features such as entertainment, usefulness, informativeness and irritation on consumers’ attitude toward the brand’s social media; (2) to examine the impact of these
attitudes on brand loyalty, brand awareness, and purchase intention and finally, and
(3) the explore differences between demographic factors on these constructs. The
findings of this research will provide some insights into the impact of different features of social media which will be useful for practitioners and academics interested in
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT
523
social media. The flow of this paper is as follows: first we describe the theoretical
framework, second, based on this framework, we develop a conceptual framework and
hypothesis. Subsequently, we will discuss research methods and results followed by
discussion and managerial implications. Finally, limitations and future research will be
discussed.
Literature review
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
Theoretical framework
Davis (1989) proposed the technological acceptance model (TAM) to explain the
potential user’s behavioral intention to use a technological innovation. TAM has
been a widely used models of information systems toward various technically
related platforms, such as websites (Ha & Stoel, 2009; Hausman & Siekpe, 2008;
Lee, Cheung, & Chen, 2005; Saade, Nebebe, & Tan, 2007). Based on the theory of
reasoned action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980) and the theory of planned behavior
(Ajzen, 1985), TAM suggests a belief–attitude–intention–behavior causal relationship for predicting technological acceptance among potential users (Davis, 1989;
Ha & Steol, 2009). This theory proposes that perceived usefulness and perceived
ease of use will influence people’s intention to use it. However, few studies show
that perceived ease of use have diminished as users become familiar with the technology (Hausman & Siekpe, 2009; Venkantesh & Morris, 2000). In addition, in
our study, most people are already familiar with social media. Therefore, this study
excludes ease of use and extends it with other variables which have been found to
have more effect (Hausman & Siekpe, 2009). Based on the findings, we argue that
consumers’ attitude toward social media will be influenced by various beliefs (i.e.,
entertainment, usefulness, informativeness, irritation) derived from the social
media.
Conceptual framework and hypothesis development
The conceptual framework of this study is presented in Figure 1. We argue that the
features of entertainment, usefulness, informativeness, and irritation of a brand’s
Figure 1. Conceptual framework.
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
524
D. ARLI
social media are related to consumers’ attitude toward the brand’s social media
(Ducoffe, 1996). Subsequently, these attitudes will influence consumers’ brand loyalty, brand awareness, and purchase intention (see Figure 1).
A study found that entertainment value influences users’ perceptions toward the
highest rated and lowest rated websites (Eighmey, 1997). The entertainment construct refers to the extent to which an online platform is considered entertaining
and fun to users (Eighney & McCord, 1998). One of the key reasons of using a
social networking site is the entertainment value (Cheung, Chiu, & Lee, 2001; De
Vries, Gensler, & Leeflang, 2012; Dholakia, Bagozzi, & Pearo, 2004; Lin & Lu,
2011; Park, Kerk, & Valenzuela, 2009). Through entertainment, users are able to
interact with the site which will enhance their experience of visiting the site
(Ducoffe, 1996; Hausman & Siekpe, 2008). Online interactions are often means for
users to fill their needs for “escapism, diversion, aesthetic enjoyment, or emotional
release” (Ducoffe, 1996, p. 2). This factor leads people to consume and contribute
to brand related content (Muntinga, Moorman, & Smith, 2011). Entertaining ads
have a positive effect on attitude toward the ad (Taylor et al., 2011). Hence, users
will have a positive attitude toward social media when they feel they are being
entertained by the social media (Luo, 2002). This lead to the following hypothesis:
H1: Perceived entertainment is positively related to attitude toward a brand’s social
media.
Davis (1989, 320) defined perceived usefulness as “the degree to which a person
believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job performance”.
Studies have found that usefulness influenced consumers’ attitude toward a new
technology (Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1992; Kang & Lee, 2010; Kwon & Wen,
2010; Ha & Stoel, 2009), and was positively related to adoption of information
technology (Pontiggia & Virili, 2010; Sledgianowski & Kulviwat, 2009; Wu et al.,
2007). In the context of social media, a brand page (for example, on Facebook or
Twitter) will allow consumers to be become acquainted and up to date with the
brand.
H2: Perceived usefulness is positively related to attitude toward a brand’s social media.
Information-seeking is one of the key reasons for people to use social networking sites (De Vries et al., 2012; Lin & Lu, 2011). Muntinga et al., (2011) suggest
that the pursuit of information explains why people consume brand-related content. Social media is informative if it allows users to evaluate among alternatives to
reach satisfying exchanges (Ducoffe, 1996; Hausman & Siekpe, 2009; MontoyaWeis, Voss, & Grewal, 2003). Consumers reacted most favorably to advertising
which was perceived as offering information value (Taylor et al., 2011). Thus,
based on this body of research, it is hypothesized:
H3: Perceived informativeness is positively related to attitude toward a brand’s social media.
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT
525
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
In the context of a website, distractions such as broken links, inappropriate use
of graphics, and disorganized sites may irritate users (Hauman & Siekpe, 2009).
Irritation can be defined as unintended consequences of a website, in which the
online platform is messy and irritating to users (Eighmey & McCord, 1998). It can
be caused by elements of social media that consumers find offensive or annoying
(Ducoffe, 1996). Irritation may lead to a general reduction of ad effectiveness and
perceived value to the audience (Aaker & Bruzone, 1985; Hasan, 2016; Luo, 2002).
Irritating banners or content triggering human anxiety distract consumers’ attention and experience (Ducoffe, 1996; Luo, 2002). Ducoffe (1996) found a negative
correlation between irritation and the ad value and attitude toward web advertising. Hence, in the context for social media, we hypothesize that:
H4: Perceived irritation is negatively related to attitude toward a brand’s social media.
Oliver (1997, p. 392) defined brand loyalty as “a deeply held commitment to
rebuy or repatronize a preferred product or service consistently in the future,
despite situational influences and marketing efforts having the potential to cause
switching behavior”. While brand awareness is defined as the strength of the brand
in consumers’ memory or how easy it is for consumers to evoke the brand (Keller,
1993). Brand awareness creates an association in memory about a particular brand
(Stokes, 1985). Due to its unprecedented growth, social media now becomes the
ultimate platform for word of mouth through liking, sharing, posting, or commenting on a particular brand that they like or dislike (Seraj, 2012). Brands promoted through social media have the ability to maintain the recognition and recall
of the follower, as the average time for a person spending time on Facebook is
around 40 minutes a day (Brustein, 2014). DeVries et al. (2012) found that brand
post on top of brand page were able to improve brand popularity. Thus, attitudes
toward a brand may influence one’s loyalty and awareness toward that brand.
Hence, we propose the following hypotheses:
H5: Attitude toward a brand’s social media is positively related to brand loyalty.
H6: Attitude toward a brand’s social media is positively related to brand awareness.
Purchase intention is the combination of consumers’ interest with the possibility of one buying a product, which are strongly related to the attitude
toward a particular brand (Kim, Kim, & Johnson, 2010; Kim & Ko, 2012). In
the context of e-commerce, purchase intention is a result of pre-purchase satisfaction (Bai et al., 2008; Chen et al., 2010). Thus, purchase intention is a good
indicator for measuring consumers’ future behaviour based on their attitudes
(Kim & Ko, 2012).
H7: Attitude toward a brand’s social media is positively related to purchase intention.
Decades of research have established the correlation between brand loyalty,
brand awareness, and purchase intention (Esch, Langner, Schmitt, & Geus, 2006;
526
D. ARLI
Jacoby & Kyner, 1973). Brand loyalty and awareness have been found to play an
important role in influencing consumers’ attention when making a purchase
(Percy & Rossiter, 1992). Wang, Yu, and Wei (2012) found that peer communications which may increase awareness influenced consumers’ purchasing decisions.
Similarly, a brand for which a consumer has a higher level of self-awareness will be
more likely to be considered and, therefore, selected, than a brand of which the
consumer is unaware (Woodside & Wilson, 1985). In various purchase intention,
brands will be presented first to consumers. Hence, consumer awareness of the
brand will become the deciding factor influencing their decision (Dodds, Monroe,
& Grewal, 1991). This leads to the following hypotheses:
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
H8: Brand loyalty is positively related to purchase intention.
H9: Brand awareness is positively related to purchase intention.
Methodology
Data collection
Data for this study was collected through a large public university in Australia.
Paper surveys were distributed to students, their friends and members of their
immediate families. Of 800 questionnaires, 761 were collected. Of these, 724 were
usable, yielding a response rate of 90%. Male and female respondents were almost
equal in number (49% and 51%, respectively). Most participants were single
(59%), and 37% were married. The age range was 18–20 years (33%), 21–29 years
(43%), 30-39 years (7%), 40–49 years (8%), and 50 and above (9%). Most respondents own social media: Facebook (92%), Instagram (54%), Twitter (27%), LinkedIn
(20%), and GoogleC (31%). Table 1 summarizes the demographic profile of
respondents.
Measurement instrument
We first asked participants to name three brands that they follow or “like” on
social media. Subsequently, we asked about their attitudes toward these brands.
This technique ensures their real attitudes toward a particular brand name and
indicates the accessibility or “prominence” of the brand in the participant’s memory (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fazio, 1990; Romaniuk & Sharp, 2004). Scales to
measure each of the factors in the model were developed based on the previous
literature and using existing scales where possible. All items were anchored on a
5-point Likert-type scale. Purchase intentions and attitude toward the site were
measured using items from Yoo and Donthu (2001a). Examples are “I will definitely buy products from this company in the near future” and “social media
makes it easy for me to build a relationship with companies”. Questions about
brand awareness and brand loyalty were adapted from Yoo and Donthu (2001b).
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT
527
Table 1. Demographic profile of study respondents.
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
Percentage
Age
18–20 years old
21–29 years old
30–39 years old
40–49 years old
50 and above
Gender
Female
Male
Education
High school completed
Some college completed
college completed
Graduate school completed
Income
Below $20,000
$21,000–$40,000
$41,000–$80,000
$80,000 and above
Marital status
Single
Married
Divorce/widowed
Others
Social media account
Facebook
Yes
No
Instagram
Yes
No
Twitter
Yes
No
LinkedIn
Yes
No
GoogleC
Yes
No
33%
43%
7%
8%
9%
51%
49%
42%
16%
29%
13%
48%
24%
18%
10%
65%
19%
4%
12%
92%
8%
54%
45%
27%
73%
20%
80%
31%
69%
Two examples are “I can recognize X among other competing brands” and “I consider myself to be loyal to X”.
Ducoffe’s (1996) three-item scales were adapted to measure entertainment (that
their social media experiences are enjoyable), informativeness (that social media
sites are good sources of product information), and irritation (belief that social
media sites are annoying). Finally, perceived usefulness (using social media can
improve my shopping performance) was adapted from Davis’s (1989) TAM model.
The conceptual model was tested according to Anderson and Gerbing (1988)).
Prior to analysing the data, an item-to-total correlation test was performed to test
for inconsistencies among the various items. Items that scored below .40 were
deleted. As a final step in scale purification, λ loadings from Confirmatory Factor
Analysis (CFA) were evaluated. Results were higher than .5 and t-values were statistically significant at the .05 level. Reliability analysis was first assessed using
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
528
D. ARLI
Cronbach’s alpha. In addition, the composite reliability (r) of the constructs was
evaluated. All scales demonstrated acceptable Cronbach’s alphas and composite
reliabilities (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).
Overall, the measurement model exhibited a reasonable fit with the sample data,
supporting validity. Fit measures used to assess this model included the ratio of x2
to the degree of freedom (1019.923 /390). The results for the measurement model
suggested a good fit of the model to the data with x2x/df ratios less than the threshold value of 3.0 (Bollen, 1989). Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
(RMSEA) D 0.047. RMSEA values were below the accepted .08 threshold (Byrne,
1998; J€oreskog & S€
orbom, 2003). The model fit shows a score of CFI D 0.959;
NFI D 0.936; TLI D 0.954; and IFI D 0.959. The values of overall fit (specifically
CFI, NFI, TLI, and IFI) were all above the threshold (.9) for acceptable model fit
(Byrne, 1998). Furthermore, the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) for each construct also demonstrated acceptable discriminant validity by exceeding the .5
threshold (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988; Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Finally, following Podsakoff et al. (2003) we adopted statistical methods to assess common method bias. We
applied a marker variable (MV) to assess whether our measure suffered from common method bias. We found that common method bias was not an issue in this
study. Table 2 summarized the reliability scores and Table 3 summarized the correlation between variables.
Results
Structural equation modelling (SEM) was conducted using AMOS v.20. The
path coefficients of the structural equation model provided direct evidence of
the hypotheses supported (see Figure 2). Results suggest that entertainment,
usefulness and informativeness positively influence consumers’ attitude toward
the social media, while irritation negatively influences consumers’ attitude
toward the social media. Thus, the findings support H1 (b D 0.548;
t D 12.304), H2 (b D 0.180; t D 4.615), H3 (b D 0.221; t D 5.321), and H4
(b D ¡0.062; t D ¡2.006). Furthermore, consumers’ attitude toward the
social media positively influence loyalty, awareness and purchase intention.
Hence, the results support H5 (b D 0.477; t D 9.470), H6 (b D 0.424;
t D 9.717), and H7 (b D 0.178; t D 4.062). Finally, consumers’ loyalty and
awareness toward the brands positively influences their purchase intention,
thus supporting H8 (b D 0.244; t D 5.813), and H9 (b D 0.419;
t D 10.702) (see Table 4). Overall, entertainment has the strongest impact on
consumers’ attitudes, followed by informativeness, usefulness and, finally, irritation. Finally, in regards to differences between demographic factors, Analysis
of Variance (ANOVA) was used to explore differences between demographic
factors. The results show significant differences between various age, gender
and income levels. First – differences between age groups. The analysis indicates differences between age group in their perception toward entertainment
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT
529
Table 2. Scale items and reliabilities.
Code
ENT01
ENT02
ENT03
IRR01
IRR02
IRR03
Their social media are enjoyable
Their social media are pleasing
Their social media are entertaining
Usefulness
Using social media can improve my shopping
performance.
Using social media can increase my shopping
productivity.
Using social media can increase my shopping
effectiveness.
Using their social media are useful.
Informativeness
Social media are good sources of product
information.
Social media supplies relevant information.
Social media are informative about the
company’s products.
Irritation
Social media are annoying.
Social media are frustrating.
Social media are irritating.
Code
Scale item
Attitude toward a brand’s social media
USE01
USE02
USE03
USE04
INFO01
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
Scale item
Entertainment
INFO02
INFO03
ATT01
ATT02
ATT03
ATT04
ATT05
LOYAL01
LOYAL02
LOYAL03
AWARE01
AWARE02
AWARE03
AWARE04
AWARE05
INTENT01
INTENT02
INTENT03
INTENT04
Social media makes it easy for me to build a
relationship with companies.
I am satisfied with the service provided by
their social media.
I feel comfortable in surfing their social media.
I feel surfing their social media are a good way
to spend my time.
Compared with other social media, I would
rate this one as one of the best.
Brand Loyalty
I consider myself to be loyal to the company
above.
The above companies would be my first
choice.
I will not buy other brands if the above
company’s product is available at the store.
Awareness
I can recognize the companies’ above among
other competing brands.
I am aware of the company above.
Some characteristics of the company above
come to my mind quickly.
I can quickly recall the symbol or logo of the
companies’ above.
I have no difficulty in imagining the above
companies in my mind.
Purchase Intention
I will definitely buy products from this
company in the near future.
I intend to purchase products from this
company in the near future.
It is likely that I will purchase products from
this company in the near future.
I expect to purchase products from this
company in the near future.
Standardized Average variance
loading
extracted
Delta
0.90
0.91
0.83
0.78
0.89
0.19
0.17
0.31
0.19
0.75
0.92
0.89
0.21
0.77
0.41
0.69
0.84
0.84
0.82
0.93
0.93
0.33
0.80
0.50
0.33
0.14
0.14
Delta
0.52
0.74
0.45
0.72
0.69
0.48
0.52
0.69
0.52
0.79
0.58
0.38
0.85
0.28
0.63
0.60
0.78
0.65
0.39
0.81
0.81
0.34
0.34
0.81
0.34
0.82
0.33
0.86
0.87
0.29
0.29
Standardized Average variance
loading
extracted
0.69
0.91
0.21
0.90
0.82
Composite
reliability
0.78
0.26
0.93
0.92
0.15
0.82
0.33
0.92
Composite
reliability
0.83
0.80
0.94
0.94
530
D. ARLI
Table 3. Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations for the study construct.
1. Entertainment
2. Usefulness
3. Informativeness
4. Irritation
5. Attitude
6. Brand Loyalty
7. Brand Awareness
8. Purchase Intention
1
2
1
0.514
0.472
¡0.319
0.669
0.389
0.337
0.350
1
0.542
¡0.281
0.545
0.287
0.316
0.398
3
1
¡0.325
0.527
0.248
0.325
0.309
4
1
¡0.344
¡0.099
¡0.125
¡0.171
5
1
0.330
0.302
0.364
6
1
0.401
0.446
7
1
0.541
8
Mean
SD
1
3.47
3.40
3.53
2.81
3.30
3.15
3.87
3.60
0.78
0.93
0.80
0.93
0.71
0.85
0.70
0.86
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
Note: < 0.05; < 0.01
(p < 0.001), usefulness (p < 0.001), informativeneness (p < 0.05), attitude
(p < 0.001), brand loyalty(p < 0.05), and purchase intention (p < 0.001). In
summary, consumers who are 50 and above tend to have less positive perception toward social media compared to consumers who are under 40. The
results show age gaps between younger and older consumers on their perception (entertainment, usefulness, informativeness, and attitude toward social
media). Furthermore, younger consumers (18-20 years) are more loyal toward
brands than consumers who are 21–29 and 50 and above. There are no significant differences between various age groups on the irritability of social media.
Second – differences between gender. The results show significant differences
on their perception of enterntainment (p < 0.05), usefulness (p < 0.05), irritation (p < 0.05), attitude (p < 0.05), and awareness (p < 0.05). Female are
more likely to find social media entertaining, usefulness, less irritated, more
positive attitude but less aware compared to male consumers. It shows female
are more receptive toward various social media features. Finally – differences
between income levels. The results show that income has limited influenced
on how consumers perceived social media’s features. There were significant
differences between income levels on their attitude, awareness and how they
perceived the entertainment features of social media. No significant differences
are found on usefulness, informativeness, irritation, brand loyalty, and purchase intention. Table 5 summarizes the results between within demographic
factors.
Figure 2. Results of model fit.
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT
531
Table 4. Path coefficients.
Hypothesis
H1
H2
H3
H4
H5
H6
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
H7
H8
H9
Structural parameters
Entertainment ! Attitude toward a brand’s social
media (C)
Useful ! Attitude toward a brand’s social media
(C)
Informativeness ! Attitude toward a brand’s
social media (C)
Irritation ! Attitude a brand’s social media (–)
Attitude toward a brand’s social media ! Loyalty
(C)
Attitude toward a brand’s social media !
Awareness (C)
Attitude toward a brand’s social media !
Purchase intention (C)
Loyalty ! Purchase intention (C)
Awareness ! Purchase intention (C)
Standardized regression
weight
t
Test
12.304
Supported
0.180
4.615
Supported
0.221
5.321
Supported
¡0.062
0.477
–2.006
9.470
Supported
Supported
0.424
9.717
Supported
4.062
Supported
5.813
10.702
Supported
Supported
0.548
0.178
0.244
0.419
Discussion and managerial implications
Consumers’ acceptance toward various technology platforms is varied. Hence,
understanding why consumer accept or reject social media had proven to be one
of the most challenging issues in social media marketing. The theory of technological acceptance model (TAM) strongly suggests that usefulness is a fundamental
driver of acceptance or usage of technology (Venkantesh & Davis, 2000). The
results of this study contribute to the application of the technological acceptance
model (TAM). Similar to other studies (i.e., Ha & Stoel, 2009; Hausman & Siekpe,
2008; Saade et al., 2007), this study confirmed that TAM to be a useful theoretical
model in helping to understand and explain attitude and intention toward a
brand’s social media. Specifically, the findings of this study indicated that usefulness in an important feature toward social media acceptance. However, it provides
evidence for the additional key variables to TAM such as entertainment, and informativeness when applied to users’ engagement on social media sites.
The results of this study reveal that one of the most important features of a
social media site is entertainment. Entertainment has the strongest impact on consumers’ attitudes toward a brand’s social media. Thus, in the context of social
media promotion, the element of entertainment should become a main feature of
its social media. For example, creating regular games, hash tag competitions, and
giving rewards to followers. One example is Dove’s social media campaign: Dove
Men C Care. Through a survey of 1000 dads, the campaign is trying to understand
what it means to be a dad. The campaign video featuring the role of a dad is very
entertaining and has generated over 12M views. This effort will entice consumers
to keep engaging with the sites and encourage them to share with others.
Moreover, usefulness and informativeness of social media positively influences
consumers’ attitudes. It is imperative for managers to add features that would
improve consumers’ daily life in relation to the products and services. For example,
Age:
18–20 years old
21–29 years old
30–39 years old
40–49 years old
50 and above
Gender:
Male
Female
Income:
Below $20,000
$21,000–$40,000
$41,000–$80,000
$81,000 and above
Demographic
3.52
3.57
3.33
3.36
3.41
3.53
3.55
3.47
3.69
3.32
3.13
Entertainment
(mean)
0.020
(Note: $21–$40,000
is sig different than
$41–$80,000)
0.029
0.000
(Note: 50 and
above is sig.
different than 18–
20, 21–29, 30–39).
Sig.
Table 5. Differences between demographic (1).
3.44
3.46
3.30
3.22
3.29
3.49
3.48
3.46
3.56
3.06
2.92
Usefulness
(mean)
0.136
0.004
0.000
(Note: 50 and above is sig. different than
18–20, 21–29, 30–39; 40–49 is sig.
different than 18–20, 21–29.
Sig.
3.58
3.57
3.50
3.34
3.48
3.57
3.62
3.52
3.69
3.39
3.20
Informativeness
(mean)
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
0.124
0.145
0.001
(Note: 50 and above is sig.
different than 18–20, 21–29,
30–39).
Sig.
2.76
2.77
2.83
2.98
2.92
2.72
2.82
2.79
2.64
2.80
3.09
Irritation
(mean)
0.302
0.004
0.115
Sig.
532
D. ARLI
Age
18–20 years old
21–29 years old
30–39 years old
40–49 years old
50 and above
Gender
Male
Female
Income
Below $20,000
$21,000–$40,000
$41,000–$80,000
$81,000 and above
Demographic
3.34
3.35
3.16
3.20
3.23
3.36
3.34
3.31
3.51
3.13
3.01
Attitude
(Mean)
0.035
(Note: $41–80,00 is sig
different than below
$20,000, $21–$40,000)
0.014
0.001
(Note: 50 and above is
sig. different than 18–20,
21–29, 30–39).
Sig.
3.16
3.17
3.02
3.24
3.18
3.11
3.26
3.10
3.26
3.06
2.96
Brand
Loyalty
(Mean)
Table 5. (Continued ). Differences between demographic (2).
0.271
0.247
0.044
(Note: 18–20 is sig.
different than 21–29,
50 and above).
Sig.
3.78
3.98
3.88
3.97
3.93
3.80
3.92
3.88
3.97
3.90
3.48
Awareness
(Mean)
0.013
(Note: below $20,000 is sig
different than $21–$40,000,
$80,000 and above.
0.014
0.000
(Note: 50 and above is sig.
different than 18–20, 21–
29, 30–39, 40–49).
Sig.
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
3.57
3.67
3.58
3.56
3.59
3.60
3.65
3.66
3.63
3.56
3.11
Purchase
Intention
(Mean)
0.716
0.897
0.000
(Note: 50 and above is sig.
different than 18–20, 21–
29, 30–39, 40–49).
Sig.
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT
533
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
534
D. ARLI
companies should use social media as a point of contact for consumers to post
their questions, compliments, or complaints directly to companies. X-Box uses
Twitter as part of their customer service to interact with customers by addressing
their questions and solving problem. A survey shows 86% of users who complain
on social media would love to get a reply from the company (e-marketer, 2011).
Hence, concerns and questions need to be answered promptly. This effort will
enhance the usefulness of the social media sites. A report shows that shoppers who
see a review response are more likely to purchase (Peneycad, 2014). Furthermore,
social media sites should provide adequate and up to date information about the
product and services, for example, regular announcements about special rates for
airline companies, hotels and restaurants. This will allow users to evaluate among
alternatives to reach satisfying exchanges. However, it is also important not to
flood the social media site with information. This study shows that irritation negatively influenced consumers’ attitude toward social media. In the context of websites, another study shows that irritation did not influence people’s attitude toward
the sites (Hausman & Siekpe, 2009). However in the context of social media, it
appears that social media may irritate consumers more due to the intensity of
social media’s usage. As previously mentioned, people are now spending more
hours on social media than any other online activities. To ensure that posting will
not irritate consumers, further studies are still needed. Companies may experiment
with the frequencies of posting and monitor the number of “likes” which may indicate consumers’ attitude toward the posting. Higher “likes” and shares may indicate the postings match consumers’ expectations, while lower “likes” and shares
may be a sign that the postings are irrelevant or irritate consumers.
Moreover, the results of this study show that attitude toward social media marketing influenced brand loyalty and awareness and, eventually, purchase intention.
Compared to brand loyalty, the results show that brand awareness has a stronger
impact on purchase intention. As previously discussed, consumers are increasingly
spending more time on social media. This may be a result of marketing products
or services through social media which may instill a brand name in one’s memory,
thus heightening consumers’ awareness of the brand. Therefore, companies should
put more marketing efforts through social media which may create stronger relationships between companies and consumers. This effort can be enhanced by adding an element of entertainment, usefulness and informativeness, thus making it
easier for consumers to connect and engage with the companies. Finally, age is an
important indicator of how consumers perceive social media. Younger consumers
are more receptive toward various social media’s features than older consumers.
Companies focusing on younger consumers need to maximize the use of social
media and incorporating those features. However, at this present time, companies
targeting older consumers may use a mixed platforms which combined social
media and traditional outlets such as newspaper and radios. Older consumers are
less attracted on various social media’ features. Overall, the study concludes that
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT
535
social media matters to consumers. Thus instead of reducing investment in social
media, managers can focus more on the features of their social media campaign.
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
Limitations and future research
This study has several limitations. First, it is a cross sectional study based on a convenience sample. Around 33% of the participants are university students aged
between 18 and 21. Future research may use a longitudinal survey to explore the
changing roles of social media as perceived by consumers. Moreover, differences
between demographic profile such as gender, age, income and education can be
explored further. Consumers with higher income who have more access to internet
may perceive social media differently than consumers who have limited access to
the internet. Second, empirical findings in this study are taken from a sample of
Australian consumers which may be different than consumers in other countries,
especially consumers in the developing countries. Thus, replicating this study’s
findings with an additional sample of consumers from countries such as China or
India is necessary. Third, the regression score for irritation is low (–0.062) which
limit the impact of this variable on attitude. Future research may investigate this
issue further by conducting an experiment study on the impact of irritation on
consumers’ attitude. Finally, this study did not look at a specific social media site
(Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, etc.), but instead looked at the general
consumers’ attitude toward social media. Facebook attracts seven times more
engagement than Twitter (Adler, 2013). Thus, future research which looks at a specific social media platform may produce different results.
References
Aaker, D. A., & Bruzzone, D. E. (1985). Causes of irritation in advertising. The Journal of Marketing, 49(2), 47–57.
Aaker, D. A., & Stayman, D. (1990). Measuring audience perceptions of commercials and relating them to ad impact. Journal of Advertising Research, 2, 35–48.
Adler, E. (2013). Social media engagement: The surprising facts about how much time people
spend on the major social networks. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com.au/
social-media-engagement-statistics-2013-12
Ajzen, I. (1985), From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. Berlin Heidelberg:
Springer.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Alpar, P. (1999). Satisfaction with a web site: Its measurement, factors and correlates,” Electronic
Business Engineering, 271–287.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review
and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Dholakia, U. M. (2001). Intentional social action in virtual communities. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 16(2), 2–21.
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
536
D. ARLI
Bagozzi, R. P., & Dholakia, U. M. (2006). Antecedents and purchase consequences of customer
participation in small group brand communities. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 23(1), 45–61.
Bai, B., Law, R., & Wen, I. (2008). The impact of website quality on customer satisfaction and
purchase intentions: Evidence from Chinese online visitors. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27(3), 391–402.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 17(3), 303–316.
Brustein, J. (2014). American now spend more time on facebook than they do on their pets.
Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-07-23/heres-how-much-timepeople-spend-on-facebook-daily.
Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic
concepts, applications, and programming. NJ: Psychology Press.
Chen, Y. H., Hsu, I., & Lin, C. C. (2010). Website attributes that increase consumer purchase
intention: A conjoint analysis. Journal of Business Research, 63(9), 1007–1014.
Chen, L. D., Gillenson, M. L., & Sherrell, D. L. (2002). Enticing online consumers: an extended
technology acceptance perspective. Information and management, 39(8), 705–719.
Cheung, D. L., Au, W. K., Cheung, H. H., Chiu, C. S., & Lee, W. T. (2001). Coronary artery fistulas: long-term results of surgical correction. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 71(1), 190–195.
CNBC. (2015). Facebook earnings: 54 cents per share, vs estimated EPS of 49 cents. Retrieved
from http://www.cnbc.com/id/102376691
Common sense (2015). The common sense census: media use by tweens and teens. Retrieved
from https://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/default/files/uploads/research/census_
researchreport.pdf
Correa, T., Hinsley, A. W., & De Zuniga, H. G. (2010). Who interacts on the Web?: The intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2)
247–253.
Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information
technology. MIS quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use
computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111–1132.
De Vries, L., Gensler, S., & Leeflang, P. S. (2012). Popularity of brand posts on brand fan pages:
an investigation of the effects of social media marketing. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26
(2), 83–91.
Dholakia, U. M., Bagozzi, R. P., & Pearo, L. S. (2004). A social influence model of consumer participation in network-and small-group-based virtual communities. International Journal of
Research in Marketing, 21(3), 241–263.
Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information
on buyers’ product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(8), 307–319.
Ducoffe, R. H. (1995). How consumers assess the value of advertising. Journal of Current Issues
and Research in Advertising, 17(1), 1–18.
Ducoffe, R. H. (1996). How consumers assess the value of advertising. Journal of Current Issues
& Research in Advertising, 17(1), 1–18.
Eighmey, J. (1997). Profiling user responses to commercial website. Journal of Advertising
Research, 37(3), 59–66.
Eighmey, J. & McCord, L. (1998). Adding value in the information age: Uses and gratifications
of sites on the World Wide Web. Journal of Business Research, 41(3), 187–194.
Esch, F. R., Langner, T., Schmitt, B. H., & Geus, P. (2006). Are brands forever? How brand
knowledge and relationships affect current and future purchases. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 15(2), 98–105.
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT
537
Fazio, R. H. (1990). A practical guide to the use of response latency in social psychological
research. In C. Hendrick & M.S. Clark (Eds.), Research methods in personality and social psychology (pp. 75–97). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 382–388.
Georgios, T., & Dimitriadis, S. (2014). Brand strategies in social media. Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, 32(3), 328–344.
Goodrich, K., & de Mooij, M. (2014). How ‘social’are social media? A cross-cultural comparison
of online and offline purchase decision influences. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20
(1-2), 103–116.
Ha, S., & Stoel, L. (2009). Consumer e-shopping acceptance: Antecedents in a technology acceptance model. Journal of Business Research, 62(5), 565–571.
Hasan, B. (2016). Perceived irritation in online shopping: The impact of website design characteristics. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 224–230.
Hausman, A. V., & Siekpe, J. S. (2009). The effect of web interface features on consumer online
purchase intentions. Journal of Business Research, 62(1), 5–13.
Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004). Electronic word-ofmouth via consumer-opinion platforms: what motivates consumers to articulate themselves
on the internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38–52.
Hoffman, D., & Novak, T. P. (2012). Toward a deeper understanding of social media. Journal of
Interactive Marketing, 26, 69–70.
IPSOS. (2013). Socialogue: The most common butterfly on earth is the social butterfly. Retrieved
from http://ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?idD5954/.
Jacoby, J., & Kyner, D. B. (1973). Brand loyalty vs. repeat purchasing behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 10(1), 1–9.
J€
oreskog, K. G., & S€orbom D. (2003). LISREL 8.5: user’s guide. Los Angeles: SPSS Statistical
Software.
Kang, Y. S., & Lee, H. (2010). Understanding the role of an IT artifact in online service continuance: An extended perspective of user satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3),
353–364.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity.
The Journal of Marketing, 1–22.
Kim, J., Kim, J. E. & Johnson, K. K. P. (2010).The customer-salesperson relationship and sales
effectiveness in luxury fashion stores: The role of self-monitoring. Journal of Global Fashion
Marketing, 1(4), 230–239.
Kim, A. J., & Ko, E. (2012). Do social media marketing activities enhance customer equity? An
empirical study of luxury fashion brand”. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1480–86.
Kwon, O., & Wen, Y. (2010).An empirical study of the factors affecting social network service
use. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 254–263.
Lee, J., & Hong, I. B. (2016).Predicting positive user responses to social media advertising: The
roles of emotional appeal, informativeness, and creativity. International Journal of Information Management, 36(3), 360–373.
Lee, M. K., Cheung, C. M., & Chen, Z. (2005). Acceptance of Internet-based learning medium:
the role of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Information & Management, 42(8), 1095–1104.
Lin, K. Y., & Lu, H. P. (2011). Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3),
1152–1161.
Luo, X. (2002).Users and gratifications theory and e-consumer behaviors. Journal of Interactive
Advertising, 2(2), 34–41.
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
538
D. ARLI
MacKenzie, S. B., Lutz, R., & Belch, G. (1986).The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of
advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanations. Journal of marketing research, 23
(5), 130–143.
MacKenzie, S. B., & Lutz, R. J. (1989). An empirical examination of the structural antecedents of
attitude toward the ad in an advertising pretesting context. The Journal of Marketing, 53(2),
48–65.
Martı-Parre~
no, J., Aldas-Manzano, J., Curras-Perez, R., & Sanchez-Garcıa, I. (2013). Factors
contributing brand attitude in advergames: Entertainment and irritation. Journal of Brand
Management, 20(5), 374–388.
McQuail, D. (1983). Mass communication theory, an introduction. London: Sage Publications.
Montoya-Weiss, M. M., Voss, G. B., & Grewal, D. (2003). Determinants of online channel use
and overall satisfaction with a relational, multichannel service provider. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(4), 448–458.
Muntinga, D. G., Moorman, M., & Smith, E. G. (2011). Introducing COBRAs: Exploring motivations for brand-related social media use. International Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 13–46.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994), Psychological theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Oliver, L. R. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. New York: McGrawHill
Pace, S., Balboni, B., & Gistri, G. (2014). The effects of social media on brand attitude and
WOM during a brand crisis: Evidences from the Barilla case. Journal of Marketing Communications, 23(2), 1–14.
Papasolomou, I., & Melanthiou, Y. (2012). Social media: Marketing public relations’ new best
friend. Journal of Promotion Management, 18(3), 319–328.
Park, N., Kerk F. K., & Valenzuela, S. (2009). Being immersed in social networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications, and social outcomes. Cyber Psychology &
Behavior, 12(6), 729–733.
Peneycad, M. (2014). Increase purchase intent through social media responsiveness. Retrieved
from http://www.business2community.com/social-media/increase-purchase-intent-socialmedia-responsiveness-0864033.
Percy, L., & Rossiter, J. R. (1992). A model of brand awareness and brand attitude advertising
strategies. Psychology & Marketing, 9(4), 263–274.
Pew Research Center (2014). Social networking fact sheet. accessed November 25, 2014.
Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/social-networking-fact-sheet/
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method
biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.
Pontiggia, A., & Virili, F. (2010). Network effects in technology acceptance: Laboratory experimental evidence. International Journal of Information Management, 30(1), 68–77.
Powell, J. (2009). 33 Million people in the room: How to create, influence, and run a successful
business with social networking. NJ: FT Press.
Romaniuk, J., & Sharp, B. (2004). Conceptualizing and measuring brand salience. Marketing
Theory, 4(4), 327–342.
Saade, R., Nebebe, F., & Tan, W. (2007). Viability of the “technology acceptance model” in multimedia learning environments: a comparative study. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning
and Learning Objects, 3(1), 175–184.
Schivinski, B., & Dabrowski, D. (2016). The effect of social media communication on consumer
perceptions of brands. Journal of Marketing Communications, 22(2), 189–214.
Sensis (2015). Sensis Social Media Report. Retrieved from https://www.sensis.com.au/asset/
PDFdirectory/Sensis_Social_Media_Report_2015.pdf
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 21:21 20 September 2017
JOURNAL OF PROMOTION MANAGEMENT
539
Seraj, M. (2012). We create, we connect, we respect, therefore we are: intellectual, social, and
cultural value in online communities. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4), 209–222.
Sledgianowski, D., & Kulviwat, S. (2009). Using social network sites: The effects of playfulness,
critical mass and trust in a hedonic context. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 49(4),
74–83.
Stokes, R. C. (1985). The effects of price, package design, and brand familiarity on perceived
quality. In J. Jacoby & J. Olson (Eds.). Perceived quality. Lexington, KY: Lexington Books.
Taylor, D. G., Lewin, J. E., & Strutton, D. (2011). Friends, fans, and followers: do ads work on
social networks?. Journal of Advertising Research, 51(1), 258–275.
Van Belleghem, S., Eenhuizen, M., & Veris, E. (2011). Social media around the world 2011.
InSites Consulting.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance
model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.
Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender,
social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly,
115–139.
Wang, X., Yu, C., & Wei, Y. (2012). Social media peer communication and impacts on purchase
intentions: A consumer socialization framework. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4),
198–208.
Woodside, A. G., & Wilson, E. J. (1985). Effects of consumer awareness of brand advertising on
preference. Journal of Advertising Research, 25(4), 41–48.
Wu, J. H., Wang, S. C., & Lin, L. M. (2007). Mobile computing acceptance factors in the healthcare industry: A structural equation model. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 76
(1), 66–77.
Yoo, B., & Donthu, N. (2001). Developing and validating a multidimensional consumer-based
brand equity scale. Journal of Business Research, 52(1), 1–14.
Yoo, B., & Donthu, N. (2001). Developing a scale to measure the perceived quality of an Internet
shopping site (SITEQUAL). Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2(1), 31–45.