You are what you ‘like’: understanding online
brand engagement on image-sharing SNS
An experimental study on the effect of image-sharing SNS platform (Instagram and Pinterest) on online brand engagement, and the role of ideal self-presentation.
Saskia Bos (10432191)
Master Thesis Persuasive Communication Graduate School of Communication
Supervisors: Ivana Bušljeta Banks and Marijn Meijers 25th of October 2019
Abstract
The importance of image-sharing SNS (social networking sites) has grown in the context of brand marketing and advertising. Despite their popularity, it is not clear which image-sharing SNS platform is the best choice to increase a brands’ online brand engagement intention. This study aimed to examine the effect of image-sharing SNS platform (Instagram vs. Pinterest) on the willingness to perform online brand engagement by ‘liking’ a desirable brand post. In addition, it was aimed at examining whether this effect is mediated by ideal-self presentation. An online experiment (N = 91) with two conditions among female Instagram and Pinterest users was conducted. As stimulus material a fictional socially desirable brand was used, that was pre-tested first. Results indicate that on Instagram, ideal self-presentation is slightly more likely than on Pinterest. This study also found that ideal self-presentation has a positive influence on online brand engagement intention. Furthermore, it was found that ideal self-presentation slightly mediates the positive effect of image-sharing SNS platform on online brand engagement intention, but no direct effect was found. Based on these findings, this study adds to existing research on online brand engagement in the context of image-sharing SNS. Furthermore, practitioners could use the insights of this study for their social media strategies on Instagram and Pinterest.
Keywords: image-sharing SNS, Pinterest, Instagram, online presentation, ideal self-presentation, online brand engagement, liking.
Introduction
In a booming social media landscape, sharing visual information is considered to be one of the most popular activities (Duggan, 2013; Kim, Seely, & Jung, 2017). On image-sharing SNS the image-sharing of images can be considered as the key feature of the sites. Popular and well-known image-sharing SNS are, for example, Instagram and Pinterest. These two platforms, which are predominantly used by women, have extensively grown over the past few years (Newcom Research, 2019; Pew Research Center, 2015; Sheldon & Bryant, 2016; Friz & Gehl, 2016). Nowadays, 3,5 million people are using Pinterest in The Netherlands; this increased by 18% relative to 2018 (Newcom Research, 2019). Instagram is even more popular. At the beginning of 2019, 4,9 million Dutch people used this social medium, with number of users increasingly growing (Newcom Research, 2019).
Commercial companies are anticipating on this trend. They use image-sharing SNS more and more for the communication of product- or brand-related information and marketing messages to consumers (Ashley & Tuten, 2015). As a result, image-sharing SNS such as Instagram and Pinterest have evolved into a useful channel for brand marketing and advertising (Blanchard, 2011; Cheung, Zheng, & Lee, 2012; Clemons, 2009; Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010), where brands try to increase online brand engagement (Ashley & Tuten, 2015). This is a valuable outcome for brands, since online brand engagement has been found to have a positive influence on brand attitude, which is a precursor of purchase intention (Coursaris, Van Osch, & Balogh, 2016). The question remains as to what image-sharing SNS platform is the best choice for practitioners if they want to increase online brand engagement: Instagram or Pinterest?
No research has been done to date that compared two image-sharing SNS, Instagram and Pinterest with regard to online brand engagement. It is relevant to compare the two image-sharing SNS in this context as Instagram and Pinterest have, besides a lot of comparable characteristics, also a few differences. The main difference between the two platforms relates to their usage. Social interaction is considered to be a major motivation for
using Instagram (Geurin-Eagleman & Burch, 2016; Pittman & Reich, 2016; Ridgway & Clayton, 2016; Voorveld, Van Noort, Muntinga, & Bronner, 2018), whereas this is not the case for Pinterest (Voorveld et al., 2018). In contrary to Instagram, Pinterest users are not actively interacting with others. Pinterest could, therefore, be seen as a "solitary space for collecting ideas" (Linder, Snodgrass, & Kerne, 2014, p. 5). Thus, Instagram is a more social image-sharing SNS and Pinterest more solo.
The differences between Instagram and Pinterest with regard to social interaction are especially of interest in this thesis. Social interaction influences self-presentation depending on the social environment (Goffman, 1959). More specifically, it is found that self-presentation is influenced by the opinions and feedback of others (Erikson, 1968). Because of differing characteristics of the two image-sharing SNS platforms (Voorveld et al., 2018), it is therefore, argued that on Instagram and Pinterest different types of self are presented.
Instagram (Choi & Sung, 2018) as well as Pinterest (Phillips, Miller, & Mcquarrie, 2014), have characteristics that could be linked to ideal self-presentation. Previous research found that ideal self-presentation is likely to be presented in social interactions by showing socially desirable behavior, for example by ‘liking’ a socially desirable brand post (Hendrickse, Arpan, Clayton, & Ridgway, 2017). Therefore, in this research it is studied whether online brand engagement on Instagram differs from Pinterest, based on the expected difference in ideal self-presentation. The following research questions will be addressed in this study:
RQ: To what extent is there an effect of image-sharing SNS platform (Instagram vs. Pinterest) on online brand engagement with a socially desirable brand among female image-sharing SNS users? And to what extent is the effect on online brand engagement mediated by ideal self-presentation?
First, this study contributes to a better understanding of online brand engagement on image-sharing SNS. Second, the current research provides new insights into the particular characteristics of Instagram and Pinterest that might influence online brand engagement. More specifically, this research focuses on social interaction as a distinctive characteristic between Instagram and Pinterest, and its effect on ideal self-presentation. Third, this study contributes to literature on self-presentation and its influence on online brand engagement. Most (image-sharing) SNS share comparable characteristics (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007). By studying the underlying mechanism of ideal self-presentation, insights might also be relevant for other (image-sharing) SNS.
In addition to theoretical contributions, this study could facilitate valuable insights for practice. Brand managers, advertisers, marketeers, and other practitioners could use the insights for their social media strategies. The insights could guide decisions about the selection of image-sharing SNS, Instagram or Pinterest, in order to realize online brand engagement.
Theoretical framework
Image-sharing SNS: Instagram and Pinterest
Under the umbrella of social media, SNS can be characterized as platforms in which users are able to create a profile, connect with other users and create a network of online social contacts (Ellison et al., 2007). Examples of common SNS are Facebook and LinkedIn (Voorveld et al., 2018). Image-sharing SNS is a division of SNS in which the content on the platforms focuses on visual information, instead of a mix of textual and visual information (Mull & Lee, 2014). Examples of popular image-sharing SNS are Instagram and Pinterest (Voorveld et al., 2018).
Instagram is one of the most popular image-sharing SNS (Newcom Research, 2019). On this platform users can create their own content by editing pictures and videos through the
use of multiple filters (Lee, Lee, Moon, & Sung, 2015). Next, users can post the content on their personal Instagram page, which will automatically appear on their followers’ feed. Users can ‘like’, ‘share’, or ‘comment’ on the posts, which emphasizes the socially interactive character of the platform (Choi & Sung, 2018). When a user ‘likes’ photos and videos on Instagram, this also becomes visible to others on the platform. When clicking the ‘like’-button, the users’ name will appear below the photo, allowing followers to see what content the user ‘likes’.
Pinterest is an image-sharing SNS in which users can create moodboards. This is comparable to an online scrapbook or inspiration board. Users can ‘pin’ visual content from the internet or the Pinterest homepage, and add it to their moodboards. The moodboards can be divided into themes (Mull & Lee, 2014), for example: interior design, fashion, or food photography. On Pinterest, users can ‘pin’ content to their moodboards and comment on posts of others. Although, most Pinterest users do not ‘comment’ at all on images and moodboards of others (Phillips et al., 2014). ‘Pinning’ content is comparable to ‘liking’ content on other SNS. When a user ‘pins’ content, the user first has to select on which moodboard the image should be ‘pinned’, consecutively the image will be saved on their account. ‘Pinned’, or in other words, ‘liked’ content on Pinterest is only visible to others on the platform when a user actively visits other users’ moodboards. Concludingly, as suggested by Phillips and colleagues (2014), Pinterest could be considered as a more solo image-sharing SNS, whereas Instagram is found to be a more social image-sharing SNS (Choi & Sung, 2018).
User motivations on image-sharing SNS
With the evolution of Web 2.0 the internet also became a place in which users are able to communicate and socialize. Besides entertainment and information seeking, social interaction is one of the main motivations for using SNS (Quan-Haase & Young, 2010;
Whiting & Williams, 2013). Sub-motivations of social interaction are: connecting with existing and new friends, fitting in with others, and seeking for emotional encouragement (McQuail, 1983).
When focusing on Instagram and Pinterest, similarities with regard to user motivations are identifiable. Both platforms are used for entertainment (Voorveld et al., 2018), for example by watching enjoyable content such as celebrity pictures or fashion outfits. Topicality is another user motivation that both platforms are used for (Voorveld et al., 2018), this is the motivation of staying up to date and get informed quickly on relevant content. This could, in example, be content on the news, but also on the latest fashion trends or updates of peers.
An important difference between the two platforms is the amount of social interaction. On Instagram, social interaction is a major motivation for using the platform (Geurin-Eagleman & Burch, 2016; Pittman & Reich, 2016; Ridgway & Clayton, 2016; Voorveld et al., 2018). But unlike Instagram, social interaction is no major motivation for using Pinterest (Voorveld et al., 2018) and users are thus less oriented on their peers or other users on Pinterest, compared to Instagram.
Figure 1. An example of a desirable brand post of the sustainable sneaker brand Veja, on Instagram (left) and on Pinterest (right).
The malleable self
The difference between Instagram and Pinterest with regard to social interaction is of special interest in this thesis. Social interaction influences the type of self that is presented (Goffman, 1959). The self could be operationalized as dynamic and malleable, depending on the social environment (Mead, 1976; Giddens, 1991; Goffman, 1959; Higgins, 1987; Markus & Kunda, 1986). Similarly, according to Giddens (1991), the self is influenced by the outside world (and vice versa). The self is therefore not static, but continuously under construction and can take multiple shapes, susceptible for the social context. In line with Giddens, Goffman (1959) describes the presentation of the self as a theater performance, in which the self could be ‘front stage' and ‘back stage'. The self that is presented ‘front stage' follows social scripts and cultural norms. This ‘front stage’ self is performed in social situations with an audience, for example at work, school or in the supermarket. The ‘back stage’ self is free of social norms that dictate a particular behavior. This self is presented in situations without an audience, for example at home.
When applying these insights to the context of Instagram and Pinterest, it could be argued that the presentation of the self could differ for each platform. That is, since social interaction is a major motivation for using Instagram (Geurin-Eagleman & Burch, 2016; Pittman & Reich, 2016; Ridgway & Clayton, 2016; Voorveld et al., 2018), on this platform the self is more likely to adhere to social scripts and cultural norms and is very conscious about its ‘audience'. Thus, on Instagram it is more likely that users will present a socially desirable, or ideal self. Whereas Pinterest, is less social (Voorveld et al., 2018) and therefore free of social norms that dictate a particular behavior. On Pinterest, it is thus less likely that a socially desirable self or ideal self will be presented. In other words, it is thus expected that on Instagram a different type of self is presented compared to Pinterest.
Ideal self-presentation on Instagram and Pinterest
Ideal self-presentation is, together with actual self-presentation, one of the basic domains of the self-concept (Higgins, 1987). Ideal-self presentation is about ‘who a person ideally likes to be’ (Seidman, 2013) and the ideals, goals and qualities one strives to possess or achieve in the future (Higgins, 1987; Bargh, Mckenna, & Fitzsimons, 2002; Wylie, 1979). Actual self-presentation on the other hand, is about ‘who a person actually is’ (Seidman, 2013).
The ideal self is likely to be presented in social interactions by showing socially desirable behavior (Hendrickse et al., 2017). Therefore, it could be argued that in social environments in which social interaction is high, such as Instagram (Geurin-Eagleman & Burch, 2016; Pittman & Reich, 2016; Ridgway & Clayton, 2016; Voorveld et al., 2018), people are more likely to present their ideal self, compared to social environments in which social interaction is low, such as Pinterest (Voorveld et al., 2018).
On Instagram, users feel the need to present themselves to others and show others who they ideally are (Lee et al., 2015). Because of this social character of the platform users are likely to present an ideal version of themselves (Choi & Sung, 2018). Instagram has specific features that allow users to present a more ideal version of their selves. First, besides connecting with close friends, users also connect with online-only contacts. These are in example influencers, thus, other users that the user may not know personally in the offline world (Bayer, Ellison, Schoenebeck, & Falk, 2016; Waddell, 2016). Unlike platforms such as Facebook, users do not have to fear social sanctions of close offline friends. Because of an ideal self-presentation that is incongruent their actual self (Hollenbeck & Kaitiki, 2012), that is ‘who a person really is’ (Higgins, 1987). In this way, Instagram users are able to establish an ideal self-image that does not necessarily has to correspond with the actual self in the offline world (Zhao, Grasmuck, & Martin, 2008). Second, by the ability to
edit photos and videos, Instagram users are able to shape a self-image in the way they like to be perceived. That makes Instagram especially suitable for presentation of the ideal self (Hendrickse et al., 2017). As previously discussed, social interaction is no motivation for using Pinterest (Voorveld et al., 2018). It could, therefore, be argued that the need for self-presentation on Pinterest is less strong, in comparison to Instagram. Presentation of the ideal self on Pinterest is, therefore, less likely than on Instagram. But, Pinterest is among other things, used for future self-orientation (Phillips et al., 2014). Thus, Pinterest also has some characteristics that could relate to ideal self-presentation. However, as social interaction is a major motivation for using Instagram (Geurin-Eagleman & Burch, 2016; Pittman & Reich, 2016; Ridgway & Clayton, 2016; Voorveld et al., 2018), and this is not the case for Pinterest (Voorveld et al., 2018), it is expected that on Instagram ideal self-presentation is more likely, compared to Pinterest.
Self-presentation through ‘likes’
The communication of one’s personality to others is motivated by the need for self-presentation (Reed, Forehand, Puntoni, & Warlop, 2012), this can be done via engagement with content on SNS (Schau & Gilly, 2003; Zhang, Jiang, & Carroll, 2010; Zhao et al., 2008). SNS users ‘like’ brand posts on social media, not only to stay up to date on their favorite brands, but also to show their association with these companies and communicate a certain image of themselves (Turner & Shah, 2011; Wallace, Buil, & De Chernatony, 2014).
Consequently, the self plays an important role in brand engagement behaviors (Kim, Sung, & Um, 2019). In specific, previous research found that image-sharing SNS could be used for the presentation of an ideal self (Manago, Graham, Greenfield, & Salimkhan, 2008). The ideal self-presentation could be manifested in multiple ways. The most obvious way might be in example through sharing selfies (Lee et al., 2015; Sung, Lee, Kim, & Choi, 2016).
2016). Moreover, the ideal self could also be presented through brand engagement behaviours, such as ‘liking', ‘sharing', or ‘commenting' (Mayshak, Sharman, Zinkiewicz, & Hayley, 2017). Hollenbeck & Kaitaki (2012) found that Facebook users decide which type of self they want to present when sharing online content. They found that sharing content, a type of online brand engagement, was consistent with the presentation of the ideal self. It is, therefore, expected that liking content, another type of online brand engagement, is also consistent with the presentation of the ideal self. Thus, it is expected that ideal self-presentation could influence online brand engagement.
Online brand engagement on Instagram and Pinterest
Based on the previously discussed theoretical foundation, hypotheses can be formulated. In sum, it is found that Instagram is used for social interaction (Geurin-Eagleman & Burch, 2016; Pittman & Reich, 2016; Ridgway & Clayton, 2016; Voorveld et al., 2018), whereas Pinterest is not (Voorveld et al., 2018). Sociological theories indicate that social interaction influences self-presentation, depending on the social environment (Goffman, 1959). Therefore, it is expected that on Instagram the ideal self is more likely to be presented than on Pinterest (H1). Furthermore, prior research suggests that there is a positive influence of ideal self-presentation on online brand engagement (Hollenbeck & Kaitaki, 2012). Therefore, it is expected that ideal self-presentation has a positive influence on online brand engagement intention, in this case, ‘liking’ a brand post (H2). It is, thus, expected that a brand post on Instagram (vs. Pinterest) will result in stronger online brand engagement intentions of female image-sharing SNS users, with a socially desirable brand (H3). Concludingly, it is expected ideal self-presentation mediates the expected positive effect of Instagram (vs. Pinterest) on online brand engagement intention with a desirable brand post of female image-sharing SNS users (H4).
Based on these insights, the following is hypothesized:
H1: Ideal self-presentation of female image-sharing SNS users is more likely on Instagram (vs. Pinterest) when exposed to a socially desirable brand post.
H2: Ideal self-presentation of female image-sharing SNS users has a positive influence on the online brand engagement intention with a socially desirable brand post.
H3: A socially desirable brand post on Instagram (vs. Pinterest) results in stronger online brand engagement intention of female image-sharing SNS users.
H4: Ideal self-presentation mediates the positive effect of Instagram (vs. Pinterest) on online brand engagement intention of female image-sharing SNS users with a socially desirable brand post.
Figure 2. Conceptual model
Method
Participants and design
Image-sharing SNS platform (Instagram vs. Pinterest) Ideal self-presentation Online brand engagement intention H1 H2 H3 H4
The method for this research is an experimental between-subjects design with two conditions: Instagram and Pinterest. A brand image of a desirable brand was used as stimulus material. In one condition the brand image was posted on Instagram, in the other condition on Pinterest. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the two conditions: the Pinterest or Instagram brand post. Women with an Instagram account, Pinterest account or Instagram and Pinterest account were targeted to participate in this study. Data was collected by use of an online experiment. The link of the online experiment was first distributed in the researchers own network via WhatsApp. In addition, the online experiment link was posted on the personal Facebook page of the researcher, in which was requested to participate in the research and spread the link with peers. This snowball sampling method was used as it is a quick and easy way to find suitable respondents (Brickman Bhutta, 2012). Furthermore, the link was posted in private Facebook groups on topics as social media usage and sustainability. Data was collected within a timeframe of 2,5 weeks.
A total of 93 females participated voluntarily in the experiment. Two participants were excluded from the sample, because they didn’t answer all the questions. This resulted in a final data set of 91female participants, with 40 participants in the Pinterest condition and 51 participants in the Instagram condition. The mean age of participants was 31.44 years old (SD = 11.17, Min = 19, Max = 64). Most participants had a high education level, namely scientific education with 54.90% (N = 50) and higher professional education, namely 31.90% (N = 29). The greatest part of the participants was Dutch, namely 94.50% (N = 86). Other nationalities that were represented in the study were Belgian (1.10%), Italian (1.10%), Greek (1.10%), UK (1.10%) and USA (1.10%).
Participants first had to give informed consent for participating in the experiment. Thereafter, they had to indicate their gender. When they answered ‘male’ or ‘other', they were directed to the end of the questionnaire since this research focuses solely on women. Additionally, only participants who possessed an Instagram and/or Pinterest account were of interest for this study. Therefore, participants who indicated they had none of these two accounts were also directed to the end of the questionnaire. Participants who answered they only had a Pinterest account, were assigned to the Pinterest condition. Participants who indicated they only had an Instagram account were assigned to the Instagram condition. When participants had both an Instagram and Pinterest account, they were randomly assigned to one of the conditions.
Next, participants were exposed to the stimulus material in one of the two conditions. To ensure participants took enough time to observe the brand post carefully, it was only possible to click to the next page after 10 seconds. After seeing the manipulation, participants filled in a questionnaire measuring the mediator ideal self-presentation and the dependent variable online brand engagement intention. Lastly, participants were asked to answer questions concerning the manipulation check and their demographics. At the end of the questionnaire, a debriefing was provided, and participants were thanked for their participation.
Stimulus material
Two brand posts were created for this study, one for the Instagram condition and one for the Pinterest condition. A fictional brand was established in order to avoid pre-existing opinions or associations with existing brands that might influence the results (Kim et al., 2017). As a desirable brand, a green brand was chosen for the stimulus material. This is motivated by the fact that interest in the segment of green brands grew largely the past years (Atkinson & Kim, 2015), and is, therefore, a relevant brand type to study. Furthermore,
buying products from green brands is considered as socially desirable behavior and could, therefore, lead to a more ideal self (Cottrell, Neuberg, & Li, 2007; Griskevicius, Tybur, & Van den Berg, 2010; Iredale, Van Vugt, & Dunbar, 2008; Stiff & Van Vugt, 2008) So, using a green brand for the stimulus material might not only be relevant because of the growing interest in the product segment, it is also associated with ideal self-presentation. For the brand post, a cropped photo of a model in a white blouse was used. The text in the brand post said: Become part of the sustainable fashion revolution.
Pre-test stimulus material. In order to develop the most suitable stimulus material, a pre-test (Appendix B) on possible brand names has been conducted. Requirements for the fictional brand name were the following: low associations with existing brands, suitable for a fashion brand, and a good fit with a green brand. The three brand names that were made up were expected to be suitable for a green fashion brand and were expected to have little associations with existing brands: Fierce + Fair, Studio Pure and Hônette. Female participants (N= 19, M age= 26.79, SD age= 5.64, Min. age= 21, Max. age= 44) were asked to indicate if the brand name reminds me of another brand, is a good name for a fashion brand and is a good name for an eco- and/or fair-trade brand. Answers could be given on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
The method for this pre-test was a within-subjects design, all participants were exposed to the three brand names that were tested for the stimulus material. In order to compare the three brand names, a repeated measure ANOVA was conducted per variable. To check more specifically which brand name outperformed the others, pairwise comparisons were conducted. First, the requirement of ‘low brand associations with existing brands’ was tested with a repeated measure ANOVA which indicated that the main effect of brand association was significant F(2, 36) = 3.21, p = .052. Thus, a significant difference between the three brands have been found with regards to brand association. More specifically, a
pairwise comparison showed that Hônette (M = 2.95, SD = 1.18) significantly outperformed Studio Pure (M = 3.84, SD = 1.64) p = .043, but does not outperform Fierce + Fair (M = 3.05, SD = 1.31) significantly p = .716. Because Hônette (M = 2.95, SD = 1.18) has lower associations with existing brands than Fierce + Fair (M = 3.05, SD = 1.31), Hônette could be considered as the best brand name with regards to the first requirement.
Second, the requirement of ‘suitable for a fashion brand’ was tested. A repeated measure ANOVA showed that no significant difference was found between the three brand names F(2, 36) = 1.54, p = .228. Thus, with regards to the requirement of ‘suitable for a fashion brand’ no brand outperformed the others, so all brands names are equally suitable for the stimulus material.
Third, the requirement of ‘a good fit with a green brand’ was tested. A repeated measure ANOVA showed a significant difference between the three brand names F(2, 36) = 4.89, p = .013. More specifically, a pairwise comparison showed that Studio Pure (M = 4.74, SD = 1.66) p = .052 and Fierce + Fair (M = 5.32, SD = 1.25) p = .007 are found to have significantly stronger green brand associations than Hônette (M = 3.95, SD = 1.31). Since the Fierce + Fair (M = 5.32, SD = 1.25) has higher green brand associations than Studio Pure (M = 4.74, SD = 1.66), for this requirement Fierce + Fair is the best option.
Concludingly, Fierce + Fair scored second best on the requirement of ‘low brand associations with existing brands’, equal to the other brands on the requirement of ‘suitable for a fashion brand’ and highest on the requirement of ‘a good fit with a green brand’. Therefore, this brand name was selected to use in the stimulus material. The stimulus material that was used in the study can be found in Appendix D.
Ideal self-presentation. To measure whether participants were more likely to present their ideal self on Instagram than on Pinterest, the scale of Seidman (2013) was used. Ideal self-presentation was measured with four items: I frequently post status updates [Instagram / Pinterest] to express the way I'd ideally like to be, I frequently post photographs on [Instagram / Pinterest] to express the way I'd ideally like to be, I frequently update my [Instagram / Pinterest] profile to express the way I'd ideally like to be and I generally use [Instagram / Pinterest] to express the way I'd ideally like to be. Depending on the condition, questions were asked with regards to Instagram or Pinterest. Answers could be given on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha of the four items was = .92, which makes this scale reliable (M = 4.85, SD = 1.46).
Online brand engagement intention. Due to time and research constraints, online brand engagement was measured via the intention to ‘like’ a brand post, since ‘liking’ could be considered as a type of online brand engagement (Chauhan & Pillai, 2013). Intentions show the willingness to behave in a certain way and are a precedent of behavior (Ajzen, 1991). Therefore, this could also result in useful insights. Scales were adopted from Halaszovich and Nel (2017). Halaszovich and Nel (2017) did a study on ‘like’ intentions in the context of Facebook. Therefore, the items in the scale were adjusted to the context of Instagram and Pinterest. Thereby, three out of four items that could easily be adjusted were used. The item: I plan to become a fan of brand X on Facebook by liking the brand’s Facebook fan page, was left out since the current research is about the ‘like’ intention of a brand post, not a fan page. The three items that were used eventually, and thus adjusted to the context of the current research, were: Next time I get the opportunity to like Fierce + Fair’s post on [Instagram / Pinterest], I will do so, I intend to click the like button on Fierce + Fair 's post on [Instagram / Pinterest] and I plan to visit the [Instagram / Pinterest] account of Fierce + Fair so that I can like the brand post. Depending on the condition, questions were
asked with regards to Instagram or Pinterest. Answers could be given on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha of the three items was = .92, which makes this scale reliable (M = 4.76, SD = 1.37).
Control check. The type of image-sharing SNS platform was manipulated in the current research. A brand post was once shown in the Instagram environment, and once in the Pinterest environment. To control whether the manipulation has worked, participants were asked on what platform the brand post was posted. This was measured with one item: The brand post was posted on… The participant could select one option of a dropdown box with 7 options: Instagram, Pinterest, Snapchat, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and Youtube.
Demographic and control variables. Participants age, highest education level, and nationality were asked in the last part of the questionnaire. Age was asked as an open question. Participants could select their highest education level from a dropdown box with seven options (Appendix B), in example: Less then middle school/High school and WO/scientific education. Participants could select their nationality from a dropdown box with 195 options.
Analysis plan
Firstly, the control and randomization checks were analyzed by use of a chi square and independent samples t-test. Then, the hypotheses were tested. The first and second hypotheses were tested by use of an independent samples t-test. To control for education, the first hypothesis was repeatedly tested by use of Model 4 of the PROCESS package (Hayes, 2013), with bootstrapping analysis with 5000 samples. The third hypothesis was tested by use of a linear regression. Finally, the fourth hypothesis was tested using Model 4 of the PROCESS package (Hayes, 2013). Bootstrapping analysis with 5000 samples has been used in the estimation of the indirect effect.
Results
Control check
To control if participants perceived the manipulated conditions as intended, a
chi-square test was conducted with image-sharing SNS platform (Instagram vs. Pinterest) as independent variable. The control check question asking on what platform the post was posted was the dependent variable. A significant difference was found, χ2 (2) = 79.25, p < .001. Instagram was recognized correctly by 96.10% of the participants and 95.00% of the participants correctly recognized Pinterest. Therefore, the manipulation is considered as successful, since a vast majority recognized the image-sharing SNS platforms correctly.
Four out of 91 participants did not recognize the platforms correctly. Two participants (5.00%) in the Pinterest condition thought the brand post was posted on Facebook. In the Instagram condition, one participant (2.00%) thought the brand post was posted on Facebook, and one on Pinterest (2.00%). In order to decide if these four participants should be left out, all the analysis were repeated without the four participants. No statistical differences were found in answering the hypotheses, therefore, the four participants were included in the analysis.
Randomization check
To check whether the participants were randomly distributed over the two conditions, a randomization check has been performed. An independent samples t-test showed that participants in the Instagram (Mage = 30.41, SD = 11.31), and Pinterest condition (Mage = 32.75, SD = 10.99) did not significantly differ with respect to age t(89) = 0.99, p = .324, education χ2(3) = 3.77, p = .287 or nationality χ2(5) = 4.91, p = .428. Concludingly, participants did not differ significantly between the two conditions based on age, education and nationality. Thus, the randomization succeeded.
Correlations
A correlation matrix with all variables and control variables was made to test their relationships. Table 1 (Appendix A) shows that there is a positive significant correlation between ideal self-presentation and online brand engagement intention (r = .35, p < .01). The image-sharing SNS platform and age do not have any significant correlations with the other variables. Education shows a positive significant relationship with online brand engagement intention (r = -.24, p < .05) and ideal self-presentation (r = -.24, p < .05). Therefore, education will be used as a control variable when testing the hypothesis of the full model.
Hypotheses testing
In the first hypothesis, it was expected that ideal self-presentation would be more likely on Instagram (vs. Pinterest) when exposed to a socially desirable brand post. In contrast with H1, an independent samples t-test showed no significant difference between Instagram (M = 3.34, SD = 1.51) and Pinterest (M = 2.91, SD = 1.37), with regards to ideal self-presentation t (89) = -1.41, p = .164. But, when controlling for education by use of SPSS PROCESS Model 4 (model 4; 5000 bootstraps; confidence interval 95%; Hayes, 2013), a marginally significant influence of image-sharing SNS platform on ideal self-presentation appears b = .58, SE = .30, t (89) = 1.92, p = .057, 95% CI [-0.02; 1.18]. Thus, based upon the second test, Instagram users are slightly more likely to present their ideal self than Pinterest users. H1 is partially supported. In the second hypothesis, it was proposed that there is a positive influence of ideal self-presentation on online brand engagement intention in the context of image-sharing SNS. In line with H2, a positive influence was found of ideal self-presentation on online brand engagement intention. The results of a linear regression analysis indicated that ideal self-presentation is a significant positive predictor b = 0.33, SE = .09, β =
.35, t (89) = 3.47, p < .001 of online brand engagement intention (R² = .12, F (1, 89) = 12.07, p < .001). In other words, when ideal self-presentation increases, online brand engagement intention will also increase. H2 is supported.
In the third hypothesis it was proposed that a brand post on Instagram (vs. Pinterest) results in stronger online brand engagement intention. In contrast with H3, an independent samples t-test showed no significant influence of image-sharing SNS platform on online brand engagement intention t (89) = 1.36, p = .179, also not when controlling for education. Thus, Instagram (M = 3.07, SD = 1.45) does not differ significantly from Pinterest (M = 3.46, SD = 1.26) with regards to its influence on online brand engagement intention. So, H3 is rejected.
In the fourth hypothesis, it was proposed that ideal self-presentation mediates the positive effect of Instagram (vs. Pinterest) on online brand engagement intention. As showed in H3, there is no significant direct effect of image-sharing SNS platform on online brand engagement intention. To answer H4 the mediator ideal self-presentation was included in SPSS PROCESS Model 4 (model 4; 5000 bootstraps; confidence interval 95%; Hayes, 2013). The indirect effect between image-sharing SNS platform, via ideal self-presentation, on online brand engagement intention, was tested. At first, no indirect effect was found (indirect effect = .15, SE= .13, 95% CI [-0.05; 0.41]). But when controlling for education, the analysis showed a marginally indirect effect (indirect effect = .19, SE= .13, 95% CI [-0.01; 0.48]). Based upon the second test, ideal self-presentation has a marginal mediating role in the effect of image-sharing SNS platform on online brand engagement intention, with a stronger effect for Pinterest (M = 3.46, SD = 1.26) than for Instagram (M = 3.07, SD = 1.45). This finding contradicts with H4, therefore, H4 is rejected.
The aim of this thesis was to examine the effect of image-sharing SNS platform (Instagram vs. Pinterest) on online brand engagement intention. It was expected that ideal self-presentation mediated this positive effect. Based on relevant theories, four hypotheses were formulated. Data was gathered through an online experiment among female image-sharing SNS users. As stimulus material a desirable brand post was posted once on Instagram and once on Pinterest. Based on the results the research questions can be answered, and conclusions can be drawn: To what extent is there an effect of image-sharing SNS platform (Instagram vs. Pinterest) on online brand engagement with a socially desirable brand among female image-sharing SNS users? And to what extent is the effect on online brand engagement mediated by ideal self-presentation?
At first, no significant influence of image-sharing SNS platform on ideal self-presentation of image-sharing SNS users was found (H1). But, when controlling for education, a marginally positive effect of image-sharing SNS platform on ideal self-presentation appeared. It showed a stronger effect for Instagram, than for Pinterest. A possible explanation of these contradicting results, when controlling for education and when not, could be that higher educated women are more likely to use Instagram, than Pinterest. This is in line with recent findings that suggest that 43% of Instagram users (Clement, 2019) and 38% of the Pinterest users (Clement, 2019) have a higher education degree. Although this result that the current study found might not be very convincing, it is in line with previous research of Choi & Sung in which they suggest that on Instagram the ideal self is presented (2018).
The second conclusion concerns the expected positive influence of ideal self-presentation on online brand engagement intention of female image-sharing SNS users (H2). The results indicated that there was a positive, significant effect of ideal self-presentation on online brand engagement intention. Thus, when ideal self-self-presentation was high, this also increased online brand engagement intention. This finding supports previous
research that suggests that self-presentation can be done via engagement with content on SNS (Schau & Gilly, 2003; Zhang et al., 2010; Zhao et al., 2008; Turner & Shah, 2011; Wallace et al., 2014). More specifically, it supports other research that found that online brand engagement is a way of ideal self-presentation (Hollenbeck & Kaitaki, 2012).
The third conclusion concerns the effect of image-sharing SNS platform on online brand engagement intention. In which it was expected that female image-sharing SNS users would have stronger intentions to ‘like’ a socially desirable brand post on Instagram than on Pinterest (H3). In contrast with H3, no effect of image-sharing SNS platform on online brand engagement intention was found. This finding contradicts to prior research that suggests socially desirable behavior, in this context online brand engagement intention with a socially desirable brand, is more likely to be done in social interactions (Hendrickse et al., 2017). It was therefore expected that on Instagram, in which social interaction is high, online brand engagement intention would be stronger than on Pinterest, in which social interaction is low (Voorveld et al., 2018). A possible explanation for the fact that no difference was found between the two image-sharing SNS might be that a fictional brand was used in the stimulus material. It could be that participants were holding back with regards to ‘liking’ the post, because online brand engagement is more likely to occur when there is already an existing relationship with the brand (Bergkvist & Bech-Larsen, 2010; Fournier, 1998).
Finally, the fourth conclusion concerns the expected mediating role of ideal self-presentation in the positive effect of Instagram (vs. Pinterest) on online brand engagement intention (H4). It was found that ideal self-presentation marginally explains the effect between image-sharing SNS platform and online brand engagement intention, when controlling for education. The effect was, in contrast to H4, stronger for Pinterest than for Instagram. This contradicts previous research in which it was found that, Instagram is used for ideal self-presentation (Choi & Sung, 2018) and ideal self-presentation influences online
brand engagement (Hollenbeck & Kaitaki, 2012). It is thus striking, that a stronger influence of Pinterest on online brand engagement was found when mediated by ideal self-presentation, compared to Instagram. A possible explanation of this effect might be that Pinterest users are more receptive to (brand) messages, because of the authentic character of the platform (Labrecque, Markos, & Milne, 2011). Instagram could be considered as a less authentic platform, since on Instagram buying ‘likes’, followers and views (Paquet-Clouston, Bilodeau, & Décary-Hétu, 2017), as well as, brands that are paying influencers to collaborate (Audrezet, De Kerviler, & Guidry Moulard, 2018) is becoming more and more common.
Concludingly, in contrast with H4 Pinterest was found to have a stronger effect on online brand engagement intention than Instagram, when mediated by ideal self-presentation. Thus, to answer the question what platform brands should choose to increase online brand engagement intention when considering ideal self-presentation is, unexpectedly, Pinterest.
Limitations and suggestions for future research
This research has a few limitations. First, the setting of the online experiment was artificial. The stimulus material that participants were exposed to was not viewed on their own account. Just like other online experiments, external validity is a major limitation in this method (Boeije, & Hart, 2009). Future research could make the experiment as realistic as possible by integrating the brand post on participants’ own Instagram and Pinterest accounts.
Next, generalizability of the findings is limited. At first, the sample size of 91 mainly higher educated Dutch women, might be too narrow for generalization of the results to a broader population. Second, in the stimulus material a desirable brand post was used from a green brand. Therefore, the results of the current study are only applicable for the category of green brands. In order to improve generalization of the findings, future research could replicate this study with a bigger and more diverse sample size. Next, in order to improve
cross-category validation, future research could use another brand category in the stimulus material, for example a luxury brand.
Furthermore, this thesis only explored ‘likes’ as a type of online brand engagement intention. But other important indicators of online brand engagement intention are ‘shares’ and ‘comments’ (Chauhan & Pillai, 2013). In addition, no actual engagement has been measured, only the intention to perform online brand engagement. Future research could also incorporate ‘shares’ and ‘comments’ as an indicator for online brand engagement. Furthermore, the actual engagement could be measured in future research, instead of just the intention to perform the behavior.
A final limitation has to do with the measurement of ideal self-presentation. The items that were used of Seidman’s (2013) scale asked about frequent posting and status updating behavior, and the general use of the platforms (Appendix C). This could have been problematic in multiple ways. First, posting behavior and status updating can be considered as very specific social media practices that based on their needs, some SNS users do and some don’t (Wu, Wang, & Tsai, 2010). When using this scale, future research could focus on a sample size of active users that are actually posting content on image-sharing SNS. Second, asking what users frequently and generally do might have not been the best way to research the changes in ideal self-presentation. To overcome this problem, future research could measure ideal self-presentation two times instead of only once: before the manipulation and afterwards. Third, participants had to self-report their ideal self-presentation. But participants could have been cautious in reporting that, since it might not be a popular choice. Individuals are namely motivated to reach a type of self that matches their actual self (Higgins, 1987). In other words, participants could feel like they are deceiving their peers on the platform when they are not presenting their actual, authentic selves. Future research could look into actual
performance of ideal self-presentation on image-sharing SNS, in example by analyzing selfies in combination with interviews.
Academic and managerial implications
The current study has several academic and managerial implications. The results of this study add to existing research on online brand engagement in the context of image-sharing SNS (Hollenbeck & Kaitaki, 2012; Wallace et al., 2014; Mayshak et al., 2017; Schau & Gilly, 2003; Zhang et al., 2010; Zhao et al., 2008, Voorveld et al., 2018; Choi & Sung, 2018). No other studies compared Instagram and Pinterest in specific, with regards to online brand engagement intention. Furthermore, no other studies evaluated the role of ideal self-presentation in this context. The current research fills this gap.
As a result, this study found that when controlling for education, Instagram has a stronger positive effect on ideal self-presentation than Pinterest. This finding adds up to the study of Choi & Sung (2018) in which they found that ideal self-presentation is more likely to occur on Instagram. The current research compares Instagram and Pinterest, thus, we know now that on Instagram the ideal self is more strongly presented, than on Pinterest. Furthermore, it is found that ideal self-presentation has a positive influence on online brand engagement intention. This finding adds up to previous research of Hollenbeck & Kaitaki (2012) in which they found that sharing content is a way of ideal self-presentation. Besides sharing content, the current research found that ‘liking’ content - both types of online brand engagement - is influenced by ideal self-presentation. Nevertheless, no direct effect of image-sharing SNS platform with no difference between Instagram and Pinterest on online brand engagement intention was found. However, when taking educational background into account a marginally mediation of ideal self-presentation on the effect of image-sharing SNS platform on online brand engagement was found. In which a stronger influence was found for Pinterest,
compared to Instagram. This unexpected insight contributes to existing theory in a way that Pinterest users might use the platform more for presentation their ideal self through ‘likes’, then eventually thought.
The results of this study give insights on the importance of considering ideal self-presentation when trying to influence users online brand engagement intention on image-sharing SNS. That is, when ideal self-presentation is high, female image-image-sharing SNS users will be more likely to engage with a desirable brand online. Thus, when practitioners want to increase online brand engagement intention, they should post their branded content on a SNS which improves ideal self-presentation and or use a brand post that is likely to improve ideal self-presentation. Based upon results of this study, practitioners’ best option is, unexpectedly, Pinterest.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
Ashley, C., & Tuten, T. (2015). Creative strategies in social media marketing: An exploratory study of branded social content and consumer engagement. Psychology and Marketing, 32(1), 15-27.
Atkinson, L., & Kim, Y. (2015). “I drink it anyway and I know I shouldn’t”: Understanding green consumers’ positive evaluations of norm-violating non-green products and misleading green advertising. Environmental Communication, 9(1), 37-57.
Audrezet, A., De Kerviler, G., & Guidry Moulard, J. (2018). Authenticity under threat: when social media influencers need to go beyond self-presentation. Journal of Business Research.
Bargh, J., Mckenna, K., & Fitzsimons, G. (2002). Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the “true self” on the internet. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 33-48. Bayer, J.B., Ellison, N.B., Schoenebeck, S.Y., & Falk, E.B. (2016). Sharing the small
moments: ephemeral social interaction on snapchat. Information, Communication &
Bergkvist, L., & Bech-Larsen., T. (2010). Two studies of consequences and actionable antecedents of brand love. Journal of Brand Management, 17(7), 504-18.
Brickman Bhutta, C. (2012). Not by the book: Facebook as a sampling frame. Sociological Methods and Research, 41(1), 57-88.
Blanchard, O. (2011). Social media ROI: Managing and measuring social media efforts in your organization. Boston: Pearson Education.
Boeije, H., & Hart, H. (2009). Onderzoeksmethoden. Den Haag: Boom Onderwijs.
Bunker, M.P., Rajendran, K.N., & Corbin, S.B. (2013). The antecedents of satisfaction for Facebook "likers" and their effect on word-of-mouth. Marketing Management Journal, 23(2), 21-34.
Chauhan, K., & Pillai, A. (2013). Role of content strategy in social media brand communities: a case of higher education institutes in India. The Journal of Product and Brand Management, 22(1), 40-51.
Cheung, C., Zheng, X., & Lee, M. (2012). Consumer engagement behaviors in brand communities of social networking sites. AMCIS 2012 Proceedings, 20.
Choi, T., & Sung, Y. (2018). Instagram versus Snapchat: Self-expression and privacy concern on social media. Telematics and Informatics, 35(8), 2289-2298.
Clement, J. (2019, 23rd of May). Instagram usage reach in the United States 2019, by education. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/246208/share-of-us-internet-users-who-use-instagram-by-education-level/
Clement, J. (2019, 23rd of May). Pinterest usage reach in the United States 2019, by education. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/246191/share-of-us-internet-users-who-use-pinterest-by-education-level/ Clemons, E. K. (2009). Business models for monetizing the internet: Surely there must be
something other than advertising. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(2),15-41.
Coursaris, C. K., Van Osch, W., & Balogh, B. A. (2016). Do Facebook likes lead to shares or sales? Exploring the empirical links between social media content, Bband equity, purchase intention, and engagement. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 49, 3546–3555.
Cottrell, C. A., Neuberg, S. L., & Li, N. P. (2007). What do people desire in others? A sociofunctional perspective on the importance of different valued characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 208 –231.
Duggan, M. (2013). Photo and video sharing grow online. Pew Research Center Internet Project. Retrieved from https://www.pewinternet.org/2013/10/28/photo-and-video- sharing-grow-online/ Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:”
Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity, youth, and crisis. New York, NY: W. W. Norton. Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in
consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343-353.
Friz, A., & Gehl, R. (2016). Pinning the feminine user: gender scripts in Pinterest’s sign-up interface. Media, Culture and Society, 38(5), 686-703.
Geurin-Eagleman, A., & Burch, L. (2016). Communicating via photographs: A gendered analysis of Olympic athletes’ visual self-presentation on Instagram. Sport Management Review, 19(2), 133-145.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van Den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen: status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 98(3), 392–404.
Halaszovich, T., & Nel, J. (2017). Customer-brand engagement and Facebook fan-page “like”-intention. The Journal of Product and Brand Management, 26(2), 120-134. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process
analysis. A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.
Hendrickse, J., Arpan, L. M., Clayton, R. B., & Ridgway, J. L. (2017). Instagram and college women's body image: Investigating the roles of appearance-related comparisons and intrasexual competition. Computers in Human Behavior, 74, 92-100.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy theory: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319-340.
Hollenbeck, C. R., & Kaikati, A. M. (2012). Consumers' use of brands to reflect their actual and ideal selves on Facebook. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29(4), 395-405.
Hum, N., Chamberlin, P., Hambright, B., Portwood, A., Schat, A., & Bevan, J. (2011). A picture is worth a thousand words: A content analysis of Facebook profile photographs. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1828-1833.
Iredale, W., Van Vugt, M., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (2008). Showing off in humans: Male generosity as a mating signal. Evolutionary Psychology, 6, 386–392.
Jeong, H. J., & Lee, M. (2013). The effect of online media platforms on joining causes: The impression management perspective. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 57, 439-455.
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59-68.
Kim, D., Seely, N., & Jung, J. (2017). Do you prefer, Pinterest or Instagram? The role of image-sharing SNSs and self-monitoring in enhancing ad effectiveness. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 535-543.
Kim, D., Sung, Y., & Um, N. (2019). Actual Dove versus ideal L’Oréal: Impact of self- related brand image on advertising persuasiveness. Journal of Marketing Communications, 25(5), 1-18.
Labrecque, L. I., Markos, E., & Milne, G. R. (2011). Online personal branding: processes, challenges, and implications. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 25(1), 37–50.
Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 34-47.
Lee, E., Lee, J., Moon, J., & Sung, Y. (2015). Pictures speak louder than words: Motivations for using Instagram. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(9), 5520-556.
Linder, R., Snodgrass, C., & Kerne, A. (2014). Everyday ideation: all of my ideas are on Pinterest. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing systems, 2411-2420.
Malär, L., Krohmer, H., Hoyer, W., & Nyffenegger, B. (2011). Emotional brand attachment and brand personality the relative importance of the actual and the ideal self. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 35-52.
Manago, A., Graham, M., Greenfield, P., & Salimkhan, G. (2008). Self-Presentation and gender on MySpace. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 446-458. Markus, H., & Kunda, Z. (1986). Stability and malleability of the self-concept. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 858–866.
Mayshak, R., Sharman, S., Zinkiewicz, L., & Hayley, A. (2017). The influence of empathy and self-presentation on engagement with social networking website posts. Computers
in Human Behavior, 71, 362-377.
McQuail, D. (1983). Mass communication theory. London: Sage Publications.
Mead, G. H. (1967). Mind, self, and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Mull, I., & Lee, S. (2014). “Pin” pointing the motivational dimensions behind Pinterest. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 192-200.
Newcom Research & Consultancy B.V. (2019). Nationale Social Media Onderzoek 2019. Retrieved from https://www.newcom.nl/downloads/Newcom_Nationaal_Social-Media_Onderzoek_2019.pdf
Pew Research Center. (2015). Women more likely to use Pinterest, Facebook and Instagram; Online forums popular among men. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/08/28/men-catch-up-with-women-on-overall-social-media-use/ft_15-08-20_socmedgender_sites/
Phillips, B., Miller, J., & Mcquarrie, E. (2014). Dreaming out loud on Pinterest: New forms of indirect persuasion. International Journal of Advertising, 33(4), 633-655.
Pittman, M., & Reich, B. (2016). Social media and loneliness: Why an Instagram picture may be worth more than a thousand Twitter words. Computers in Human Behavior, 62(C), 155-167.
Quan-Haase, A., & Young, A. L. (2010). Uses and gratifications of social media: A comparison of Facebook and instant messaging. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(5), 350–361.
Whiting, A. & Williams, D. (2013). Why people use social media: A uses and gratifications approach. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 16(4), 362–369.
Reed, A., Forehand, M. R., Puntoni. S., & Warlop, L. (2012). Identity-based consumer behavior. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29, 310-321.
Ridgway, J., & Clayton, R. (2016). Instagram unfiltered: Exploring associations of body image satisfaction, Instagram #selfie posting, and negative romantic relationship outcomes. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(1), 2-7.
Schau, H. J., & Gilly, M. C. (2003). We are what we post? Self-presentation in personal web space. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 385-404.
Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality influences social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(3), 402-407.
Sheldon, P., & Bryant, K. (2016). Instagram: Motives for its use and relationship to narcissism and contextual age. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 89-97.
Stiff, C. E., & Van Vugt, M. (2008). The power of reputations: The role of
third party information in the admission of new group members. Group Dynamics, 12, 155–166.
Sung, Y., Lee, J.-A., Kim, E., & Choi, S.M. (2016). Why we post selfies: understanding motivations for posting pictures of oneself. Personality and Individual Differences, 97, 260–265.
Tausczik, Y.R., & Pennebaker, J.W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29,
24–54.
Turner, J., & Shah, R. (2011). How to make money with social media an insider’s guide on using new and emerging media to grow your business. Upper Saddle River, N.J: FT Press.
social media and social media advertising: The differentiating role of platform type. Journal of Advertising, 47(1), 38-54.
Waddell, T.F., (2016). The allure of privacy or the desire for self-expression? Identifying users’ gratifications for ephemeral, photograph-based communication. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19, 441–445.
Wallace, E., Buil, I., & De Chernatony, L. (2014). Consumer engagement with self-expressive brands: brand love and WOM outcomes. The Journal of Product & Brand Management, 23(1), 33-42.
Wu, J., Wang, S., & Tsai, H. (2010). Falling in love with online games: the uses and gratifications perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1862-1871.
Wylie, R. C. (1979). The self-concept: Theory and research on selected topics. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Zhang, S., Jiang, H., & Carroll, J. (2012). Babel or great wall: social media use among Chinese students in the United States. Proceedings of the 30th ACM international conference on design of communication, 37-46.
Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1816-1836.
Appendix A. Tables Table 1. Correlations
1 2 3 4 5
1. Online brand engagement intention -
2. Ideal self-presentation .35** -
3. Image-sharing SNS platform -.14 .15 -
4. Age .09 -.00 -.10 -
5. Education -.24* -.24* .19 -.13 -
Note. N = 91. Image-sharing SNS platform was coded as 0 = Pinterest and 1 = Instagram. **p < .01, * p < .05 (two-tailed).
Appendix B. Questionnaire Pre-test Welcome!
You are invited to participate in a short questionnaire that serves as a pre-test for my master thesis on social media and brand engagement.
This will last approximately 4 minutes.
I can guarantee that:
1. Your anonymity will be safeguarded, and that your answers or data will not be passed on to third parties under any conditions, unless you first give your express permission for this. 2. You can refuse to participate in the research or cut short your participation without having to give a reason for doing so. You also have up to 7 days after participating to withdraw your permission to allow your answers or data to be used in the research.
3. Participating in the research will not entail your being subjected to any appreciable risk or discomfort, the researcher will not deliberately mislead you, and you will not be exposed to any explicitly offensive material.
I hope that sufficient information is provided. Thank you in advance for your assistance with this research, which I greatly appreciate.
Kind regards, Saskia Bos
Informed consent for participation in this study
I hereby declare that I have been informed in a clear manner about the nature and method of the research, as described on the previous page.
I agree, fully and voluntarily, to participate in this research study. With this, I retain the right to withdraw my consent, without having to give a reason for doing so. I am aware that I may halt my participation in the experiment at any time. If my research results are used in
scientific publications or are made public in another way, this will be done such a way that my anonymity is completely safeguarded. My personal data will not be passed on to third parties without my express permission.
If I wish to receive more information about the research, either now or in future, I can contact Saskia Bos (saskia-bos@hotmail.com). Should I have any complaints about this research, I can contact the designated member of the Ethics Committee representing the ASCoR, at the following address: ASCoR secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, P.O.box 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020-525 3680; ascor-secr-fmg@uva.nl.
o I agree, and will participate in this study.
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. The brand name Fierce + Fair...
... reminds me of another brand. o Strongly disagree o Disagree
o Somewhat disagree o Neither agree nor disagree o Somewhat agree
o Agree
o Strongly agree
... is a good name for a fashion brand. o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Somewhat disagree o Neither agree nor disagree o Somewhat agree
o Agree
o Strongly agree
... is a good name for an eco- and/or fair-trade brand. o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Somewhat disagree o Neither agree nor disagree o Somewhat agree
o Agree
o Strongly agree
The brand name Studio Pure… ... reminds me of another brand.
o Strongly disagree o Disagree
o Somewhat disagree o Neither agree nor disagree o Somewhat agree
o Agree
o Strongly agree
... is a good name for a fashion brand. o Strongly disagree
o Disagree
o Somewhat disagree o Neither agree nor disagree o Somewhat agree
o Agree
o Strongly agree
